University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Disrupting cis-heteronormativity: creating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students through a critical reflection coaching group

(USC Thesis Other)

Disrupting cis-heteronormativity: creating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students through a critical reflection coaching group

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content i

Disrupting Cis-Heteronormativity: Creating Safe and Affirming Conditions for Racially
Marginalized LGBTQ + Students Through a Critical Reflection Coaching Group
by
Mary Erin Traylor, MSW

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

December 2021

ii

© Copyright by Mary Erin Traylor 2021
All Rights Reserved

iii

The Committee for Mary Erin Traylor certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Julie Slayton
John Pascarella
Artineh Samkian, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv
Abstract
The purpose of this action research study was to examine how I, as an instructional coach,
support teachers to reflect on their positionality and teaching practices in order to work towards
disrupting cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming conditions in their classroom. I
created a six-session three-month small coaching group to help teachers to learn to use critical
reflection and rational discourse as strategies to process their positionality and teaching practices.
This study took place at HCNS, a k-8 charter school in Los Angeles that serves Black and Latinx
students, via Zoom due to Covid-19. The research question guiding this action research study
was: How do I coach teachers to reflect on their positionalities and teaching practices and to
work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity by producing safe and affirming conditions for
racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students in their classroom? My conceptual framework,
grounded in transformative adult learning theories and critical social theories, informed the
development, implementation, and revision of a small group coaching program. Through critical
reflections, observational field notes, interviews, and artifacts, I was able to collect data and
analyze my practice. My findings discussed, show a need for coaches to address fear and
differentiate based on knowledge and experience. My findings also showcase my areas of
growth as a coach and leader. At the end of the study, based on findings, I created an
instructional guide for coaches to use within the context of their professional work.

v
Dedication
To my father, you passed before you could see the final product. You have been an angel,
guiding and supporting me. You lived a life where you felt the need to suppress your sexuality. I
know that pain. I dedicate this dissertation and the work I do in the future to you! I will focus on
liberation and abolition. I hope we can all be free from the social constructs placed on us. Love
you, dad!

To my niece, Anaiya, and nephew, Alijah, my dream is that you two will grow up to love and
understand all of who you are. My hope is that you, and all kids, learn that EVERYONE has
immanent value and deserves care, compassion, and LOVE. Mimi loves you!

vi
Acknowledgements
I want to begin by thanking Dr. Artineh Samkian, my dissertation committee chair.
Artineh, you are absolutely brilliant, kind, and so supportive. I can never say thank you enough
for your guidance and mentorship. You gently challenged me to do my best work and I am so
proud of what I have been able to accomplish with you by my side! I am eternally grateful.
Thank you to Dr. Julie Slayton and Dr. John Pascarella for being members of my committee. I
appreciate your guidance and feedback!
To my sister, you are my backbone. I don’t know where I’d be without your steadfast
support. Thank you and I love you! To my dear friend Jacob, I’ve learned the power of collective
care through your friendship. Thank you for being right there by my side during this whole
process. To my mom, I love you! To my colleagues and friends who participated in this pilot
program/study, thank you for being part of the coaching program and trusting me through this
process. To my USC friends, I’m so glad our paths crossed, and we went through this journey
together. Love you all!
Lastly, I want to acknowledge all the BIPOC LGBTQ+ activists, organizers, teachers,
writers, ancestors, elders, and contemporaries who have inspired me and the work I am
committed to doing. I hope that your legacy lives through me. Ubuntu.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................. 2
Statement of the Problem ..................................................................................................... 6
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................ 9
Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................................. 11
Transformative Adult Learning Theories .......................................................................... 13
Critical Social Theories ...................................................................................................... 16
Coaching ............................................................................................................................ 20
Teacher Developmental Factors ........................................................................................ 24
Critical and Transformative Praxis .................................................................................... 27
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 29
Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 30
Participants and Setting ..................................................................................................... 32
Actions .............................................................................................................................. 35
Data Collection and Instruments/Protocols ...................................................................... 38
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 43
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 45
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 46
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 48
viii
Findings ........................................................................................................................................ 49
Part 1: Action and Reaction .......................................................................................................... 51
Finding 1: Coaches Must Understand and Address Teacher Fear……………………….53
Finding 2: Coaches Must Differentiate to Address Varying Levels of Knowledge……..88
Part 2: Areas of Growth and Reflection………………………………………………………...104
Finding 3: Areas of Growth Needed Within My Coaching and Leadership Practice.....105
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………...116
Afterword………………………………………………………………………………………117
Growth as A Coach…………………………………………………………………….117
Current Understanding of My Practice…………………………………………………119
Implications for Coaches………………………………………………………….…....123
Implication for My Practice…………………………………………………………….126
References………………………………………………………………………………………127
Appendix A: Interview Protocol………………………………………………………………..140
Appendix B: Ways of Knowing Questionnaire………..……………………………………….148
Appendix C: Critical Reflection Protocol………………………………………………………152
Appendix D: Code Book………………………………………………………………………..152
Appendix E: Instructional Guide……………………………………………………………….170
Appendix F: Understanding by Design Planning Tool…………………………………………204

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Key Characteristics Page 34
Table 2: Critical Reflection Prompts (Original and Revised) Page 57
Table 3: Critical Reflection Concept Introduction Page 60
Table 4: Activity Objectives to Teach Cis-Heteronormativity Page 77
Table 5: Video Activity and Questions and Discussion Quotes Page 80
Table 6: Description of Strategies and Tools Page 94
Table 7: Stage 1 of UBD Planning Tool Page 99
Table 8: Gender Expansive Read Aloud Unit and Resource Guide Page 100

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Revised Conceptual Framework Page 12
Figure 2: Teacher Resource Submission Page 96
Figure 3: Resource List on Google Classroom Page 96

1

Introduction
I am a Black/biracial, Queer person. I am all these identities and have struggled showing
up in this world as my whole self, living in my totality. I learned at a very early age to protect
myself by only showing parts of me that are deemed normal by societal standards. I was a very
observant child, paying close attention to how relationships work and impacted by race and
gender. Growing up in the 1990’s, schools mirrored a color blind and cis-heteronormative
society. My understanding of humanness was that you belonged if you followed normative and
dominant social structures and conditions. There wasn’t much room in schools for children to
explore identities in safe and confident ways. If you were different, you were harmed. I learned
at a young age to navigate in a space that questions my humanity. As an adult, I’ve learned that
navigating this space isn’t living at all, it’s existing. We all deserve more than just the ability to
exist. As Bettina Love (2019) states in her book, We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist
Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, school is an “educational survival complex,
in which dark students are left learning to merely survive, learning how schools mimic the world
they live in, thus making schools a training site for a life of exhaustion” (p. 27).
I believe school has the potential to provide opportunities for all students to learn to love
who they are, even if society is constantly telling them that isn’t possible. I imagine schools to be
a space where Black, Indigenous, and other kids of color get to discern their gender on their own
terms and learn about the vast array of sexual identities safely. I want schools to be spaces where
transgender youth are protected and loved fiercely. This is my hope and vision for the future of
schools. This is freedom dreaming (Love, 2019). This action research self-study examined how I
worked toward actualizing this vision through my work as an educational coach in an elementary
and middle school. Through a 3-month coaching program, I interrogated the ways I support
2

teachers in developing a reflective teaching practice that focuses on critical reflection and
rational discourse, in order to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming
conditions for all students.
Background of the Problem
School is a space critical to children and youth development. Students of color who self-
identify or are perceived to identify as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning/Queer
and more (LGBTQ+) often experience significant stress in their school environment (Davis et
al., 2009). Aspects of identity, and the socially constructed norms and expectations associated,
provide a framework for how children make sense of who they are and want to be; and in school,
children are figuring out what social and identity groups they belong to (Rogers et al.,
2015). Literature on specific identity markers such as race, gender, gender expression, and sexual
orientation are all distinct, with few studies exploring identities simultaneously (Settles, 2006;
Turner & Brown, 2007). Coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989), intersectionality asserts that
social categories or identities must be mutually examined in order to explore the intersection of
institutions of oppression. Exploring child development through an intersectional lens is crucial
when examining the impact cis-heteronormativity in schools have on racial minority LGBTQ+
identity formation.
LGBTQ+ Related School Victimization
Looking specifically at school victimization, LGBTQ+ students experience bullying,
violence, isolation, and discrimination at a higher rate than their cis-heterosexual peers (Birkett
et al. 2009). According to GLSEN’s 2017 School Climate Survey, 59.5% of LGBTQ+ students
felt unsafe at school because of sexual orientation, 44.6% because of gender expression, and
35% because of their gender. Also, 95.3% of students heard homophobic remarks and negative
3

remarks about gender expression, 70% experienced verbal harassment, and 28.9% were
physically harassed (Kosciw et al., 2018). School victimization is also experienced on a school
administration level; as 62.2% of LGBTQ+ students reported experiencing LGBTQ related
discriminatory policies or practices at school (Kosciw et al., 2018). This data ensures the
prevalence and need to address issues of LGBTQ+ related school victimization.
Limited studies, however, capture the diversity within the LGBTQ+ community and the
significance of group difference in regard to the impact school victimization has on psychosocial
and mental health (Savin-Williams, 2001; Poteat et al., 2009). For example, racial minority,
questioning, and gender variant students have historically been underrepresented in literature
(Poteat et al., 2009). It is crucial to not generalize results, and to explore school victimization in
relation to the intersection of marginalized identities. According to a study conducted by Rosario
et al. (2004), Black and Latinx LGBTQ+ youth reported using fewer social outlets and disclosed
their sexual orientation to fewer people than their white LGBTQ+ peers due to marginalization
from their own self-identified racial and cultural communities. Also, school victimization may
be related to racial discrimination amongst racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students (Rosario et
al., 2004). Racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students are at a higher risk of being discriminated
against based on the intersections of race, gender, and sexual identity markers. Therefore, youth
of color may experience unique concerns connected to their experience within the LGBTQ+
community, alongside coping with impact from multiple forms of discrimination (Poteat et al.,
2009).
Psychosocial and Mental Health Implications
Violence and school victimization can cause children who are or perceived to be
LGBTQ+ to experience internalized homophobia. Because of this, LGBTQ+ youth can be
4

greatly impacted by psychosocial and mental health concerns due to discrimination and
marginalization experienced on a school campus (D’Augelli et al., 2002). According to Baam et
al. (2015), minority stress is often named as a cause for mental health disparities among
LGBTQ+ youth. This includes higher levels of depression and suicidal ideation (Baam et al.,
2015).
Even though studies show a correlation between stress/victimization and mental health
issues amongst LGBTQ+ youth (Meyer, 2013), there is little understanding on the mechanisms
through which these occur (Baam et al., 2015). LGBTQ+ stigma that can be experienced in and
out of a school setting, can lead to chronic stress and emotional distress amongst LGBTQ+
adolescents and young adults (D’Augelli et al., 2002; Meyer, 2003). For example, in a
community-based study, a strong link was found between lifetime victimization, one’s minority
sexual orientation, and mental health problems (D’Augelli et al., 2002). It’s imperative for
schools to address school victimization and mental health concerns within the diversity of the
LGBTQ+ student community.
Cis-Heteronormativity in Schools
Cis-heteronormativity is the origin of violence toward gender nonconforming and
LGBTQ+ students (Toomey et al., 2012). For students who do not conform to gender roles or are
perceived to be or are LGBTQ+, school can be unsafe and detrimental to healthy
development. An environment where adults and children create a culture that devalues specific
identities can be hostile and lead to oppression, isolation, and harm (Athanases & Larrabee,
2003). Students who are racially marginalized and whose gender and sexuality are threatened by
cis-heteronormativity are even more at risk due to their social position within a white
supremacist and patriarchal system of human hierarchy. Russell and Truong (2001) state, “as a
5

consequence of their dual minority status, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT)
racial and ethnic minorities are doubly oppressed” (p.133). Also, homosexuality is thought of as
damaging to cultural values (family, marriage, children) within Black and Latinx cultures (Icard,
1986). Therefore, many Black and Latinx students are learning homophobia, transphobia, and
gender expectations from families and members of their racial/ethnic communities and express
what they learn in harmful ways at school or internalize this oppression as self-hate.
Challenges to Deconstructing Cis-Heteronormativity in Schools
Parent/guardian response is one challenge to deconstructing cis-heteronormativity in
schools. Parent perceptions of LGBTQ+ identities, based on religion, racial/ethnic and cultural
factors, and social conditioning, can range from straight/conservative (DePalma & Jennett, 2010)
to neutral toward, or explicitly appreciative of, teachers making their classrooms more inclusive
(Ryan & Hermann-Wilmarth, 2018). It can be argued that focusing on creating conditions of
safety and affirmation for students who are or perceived to be LGBTQ+ can be intimidating for
teachers based on the uncertainty of parents’/guardians’ stance. This may strongly impact a
teacher’s decision to disrupt and deconstruct cis-heteronormativity in their classroom. As George
Johnson (2019), reminds us in his memoir-manifesto, All Boys Aren’t Blue, “adults who
participate in homophobia create kids that do the same, and homophobia denies queer people
happiness” (p. 74). Even with the challenges that may arise from parents, it’s still crucial for
teachers to build the disruptive capacity to address cis-heteronormativity in their classroom.
Limited scholarship discusses solutions and strategies on how to best support students
who identify as LGBTQ+ and a person of color. However, there is scholarship that explores the
need to reevaluate teacher preparation programs, professional development, and social
justice/multicultural education training (Asher, 2007), in order to look at creating spaces outside
6

of the dominate hetero-norm (McCcready, 2013; Brokenbrough, 2013), and to disrupt
institutions, social constructs, and stigma attached to the intersection of racial, sexual and gender
identities (Kumashiro, 2004). In his book, Beyond “Safe” Schools, Sadowski (2016) challenges
“the all-too-prevalent attitudes and practices that suggest ‘safe’ schools are enough for LGBTQ
students” (p. 9). He helps readers understand “what it might look like to take public schools in
the United States to the next level in their service to LGBTQ students and their treatment of
LGBTQ issues” (p. 9). Deconstructing cis-heteronormativity in a school will take explicit intent
from multiple stakeholders within the school system.
Statement of the Problem
I have worked at HCNS (the pseudonym for the school where my study took place) off
and on, for 13 years. HCNS is an elementary and middle charter school in Los Angeles. The
students’ racial and ethnic background is 30% Black and 70% Latinx. I began my work at HCNS
in 2007 as a 4th grade teacher. After teaching for 3 years, I went back to school and received my
Master of Social Work (MSW) and was invited back to HCNS to develop a student and family
support program that focused on providing social-emotional and behavior support, counseling,
and resources to children and families. For 8 years, I worked as the Director of Student and
Family Support, supervising, and managing a team of counselors and MSW interns.
Within my work at HCNS, I’ve come to understand how a cis-heteronormative school
culture harms the development of student identities and creates division between students, staff,
and families. As noted, it is common for Black and Latinx families to be homophobic,
transphobic, and against gender nonconforming behavior (Icard, 1986). Many students at HCNS
have developed violent language to use as a weapon to harm students who are perceived to be
part of the LGBTQ+ community. Not many students openly identify as being LGBTQ+.
7

Therefore, most victimization is due to perception. Teachers have consulted with me about the
difficulties they have with responding to such student interactions.
As I reflect, one story comes to mind. In Spring of 2018, I received a call from a teacher
who was distressed and upset. She had just left HCNS and wanted to consult with me about an
incident that happened. As she was leaving HCNS, a student stopped her and said, “Miss, I hear
you are gay.” Ms. P responded, “what makes you say that?” He responded, “Ms. H. told
me. She told me not to use the word f*ggot because it’s offensive to gay people. She said that
Ms. P is gay, and you wouldn’t call her a f*ggot, would you?” Ms. P. had a quick conversation
with the student and walked quickly to her car in total disbelief and anger.
Ms. P. is a lesbian. At the time, she was informally “out” to teachers and staff, but not to
students and families. Ms. H. forced her out in an unfathomable way without even knowing
it. When we asked Ms. H about the incident, she was honest in saying that she didn’t know what
to say at the moment, and immediately regretted it. I firmly believe that we are conditioned to
not talk about issues related to racism, sexism, and heteronormativity because these structures of
oppression are normative and dominant in society; and when issues arise, we don’t know what to
say or are met with repressive silence. Marchia & Sommer (2017) state, “normative behaviors
are perpetuated through forms of social policing. Explicitly and implicitly, certain forms of
social behaviors are normalized and rewarded within and outside of institutions, while alternative
behaviors are discouraged and penalized in the social sphere” (p 1). Therefore, many teachers
who work with children lack the capacity to respond to oppressive harm caused by homophobia
or transphobia because of discouragement and penalization. This is critical, as many teachers are
not prepared to address “issues of homophobia and heterosexism in the classroom” (Stiegler,
2008, p. 117). Greater awareness and training will be essential parts to systemically challenging
8

heterosexual privilege and address homophobic harassment and gender violence in school spaces
(Adams et al., 2004; Chaub et al., 2004; Kitchen & Bellini, 2012).
The experience with Ms. P. taught me a lot about how harmful schools can be towards
people who are or perceived to be part of the LGBTQ+ community. As someone who identifies
as Queer, it took me a long time to realize how cis-heteronormativity impacted my life as I
developed and transitioned from childhood to adulthood. Like Ms. P, and many other educators,
I was not “out” at work or in many areas of my life. As a form of protection, I steered away from
bringing my full self into the work that I do. Instead of questioning and disrupting why that was
the case, I created a personal and professional persona that steered away from my sexual
identity.
To quote Da’Shaun Harrison, a Black Queer nonbinary organizer and writer from
Atlanta, “to be visibly queer is to choose your happiness over your safety.” Because of the social
construct of human hierarchy, gender nonconforming and LGBTQ+ racially marginalized
people, including myself, often are forced to choose safety over happiness, starting at a very
young age. Due to racism and cis-heteronormativity, racially marginalized TGLBQ+ children
and youth are taught to jump between personas, the person they want to be on the inside versus
the person society told them they had to be on the outside (Johnson, 2019).
HCNS perpetuates a cis-heteronormative culture that marginalizes students who are or
perceived to be LGBTQ+ and/or display atypical gender behavior. Cis-heteronormativity in the
classroom looks like a lack of queer theory infused in curriculum, discomfort around teaching
and talking about queer issues, and the use of oppressive silence when responding to harm. The
school has provided staff with very little training around LGBTQ+ identities and issues; and
teachers at HCNS are at different comfort and capacity levels when it comes to teaching and
9

responding to issues of race, gender, and sexuality. As I moved into a new role as an educational
coach at HCNS, I wanted to examine the way I support teachers, paying attention to the ways I
perpetuate and disrupt cis-heteronormativity within my practice. Through a critical look into my
coaching practice, my hope was to transform the way I support teachers to create a culture of
safety and affirmation for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this self-study action research was to examine my coaching practice
through the development and implementation of a six-session small group coaching program that
supports teachers in creating safe and affirming conditions that centers racially marginalized
LGBTQ+ students. Through my coaching practice, I wanted to help teachers reimagine what
school can look like for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students by disrupting cis-
heteronormativity and creating classroom spaces for gender and sexuality development. The
research question guiding this study was:
1. How do I coach teachers to reflect on their positionalities and teaching practices
and to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity by producing safe and
affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students in their
classroom?
I began this process with a more ambitious study that also asked: What is my role in supporting
teachers’ effort in creating an equity minded classroom that promotes healthy gender and sexual
identity development for racially marginalized students? However, it was revised at the proposal
stage to only focus on the development of safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students.
As such the conceptual framework has been revised to reflect the new project.
10

In the sections that follow, I discuss my conceptual framework and research methods for
my study. I then discuss my findings and conclude with an afterword. The conceptual
framework highlights the theories that ground my study and the interventions I used in the six-
session coaching program I developed. My methods section explains the logistics of my study,
focusing on the plan of action taken during the dissertation study process as well as how I
examined my practice through systematic data collection and analysis. I then discuss my
findings, answering my research question and reflecting on my coaching practice. Lastly, I
conclude the document with an afterword that highlights my growth as a coach, implications, and
next steps.

11

Conceptual Framework
In this section, I present my conceptual framework, which grounds my study in specific
concepts and theory. I highlight theories used to inform my study and interventions used during
my three-month coaching program. This self-study action research, that examines my coaching
practice, is grounded in transformative adult learning theories (Mezirow, 1991), and critical
social theories (Freire, 1994; Oswald et al., 2005; Lawrence et al., 1993; Ladson-Billings, 2002).
These theories inform the specific interventions I used in my practice as an educational coach
that supports teachers to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and center racially marginalized
transgender, lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer/questioning, and more (LGBTQ+) students. Grounded
in coaching theory and andragogy, I coached teachers to use critical reflection (Brookfield, 1995)
and rational discourse (Mezirow, 1991) as tools to examine their own positionality and teaching
practices in order to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and cultivate safe and affirming conditions for
their students. Simultaneously, I examined my practice, using critical reflection as a tool to
improve my coaching. My intention was to use queer race pedagogy (Misawa, 2010) to teach
specific interventions that teachers can use in the classroom, but because fear unearthed as a
primary internal barrier to teachers feeling ready to disrupt cis-heteronormativity, I modified the
program to focus on addressing fear through critical reflection and rational discourse. As such, I
did not have the opportunity to teach the tenets of queer race pedagogy to the teachers, even
though that informed my work and development of the coaching program. My revised
conceptual framework, based on analyzing findings of my three-month coaching program, is
presented in Figure 1. In this section, I describe my revised conceptual framework, beginning
with describing the theories that informed by study.

12

Transformative Adult Learning Theories
Critical Social Theories
Safe and Affirming
Conditions
for Racially
Marginalized LGBTQ+
Students
Teacher
Disposition
Positionality
Identity
Fear
Me
Queer BIPOC
Coach
Coaching
Critical Reflection
Rational Discourse
Critical & Transformative Teacher
Praxis
Critical &
Transformative
Coaching &
Leadership
Move from
socializing to

self-authoring way
of knowing

Goal: Disrupt Cis-
Heteronormativity
Figure 1
Revised Conceptual Framework
13

Transformative Adult Learning Theories
Transformative adult learning theories is one of the two groups of theories that the study is
grounded in. The other is critical social theories which will be discussed below. Transformative
adult learning theories that make up the research in this study include Constructive-
Developmental Theory (CDT), and Transformative Learning Theory (TLT). My coaching
practice, examined in this study, is informed by these learning theories.
Constructive-Developmental Theory
CDT asserts that if adults are given appropriate developmental support and challenges,
meaningful growth will occur (Baxter-Magolda, 2009; Drago-Severson, 2012). CDT focuses on
four ways of knowing in adulthood that reflect different orientations to the world, particularly as
it relates to social justice. The four ways of knowing include instrumental, socializing, self-
authoring, and self-transforming (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Adults are
ultimately situated in one of the four ways of knowing; and one can grow from one way of
knowing to the next. CDT highlights that cultivating meaning is not a static feature, but rather
fluid depending on the right conditions (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). While I
began this study with the intention of moving myself and teachers from one way of knowing to
the next complex way of knowing, what transpired, given the three-month limit of time, the ways
of knowing were primarily for understanding what strategies to use to differentiate and best
support the teachers participating in the study, and used to explain my areas of growth. A longer
period of time would be needed to make strides in moving adults from one to another way of
knowing and to track that growth.

14

Instrumental and Socializing Knowers
My goal was to work with any teacher that wanted to be part of the three-month group
coaching program and study. It was important for me to assess where teachers were on the
typology of ways of knowing developed by Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano (2009). As
stated, HCNS serves Black and Latinx families and many students are taught to be homophobic
and gender conforming at a young age. For teachers who are instrumental knowers, their
understanding of social justice is concrete, and they are looking for tangible “things to do''
(Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Instrumental knowers may generalize experiences,
try to put themselves in other’s shoes, and have a limited worldview (Drago-Severson & Blum-
DeStefano, 2017).
Characteristics of socializing knowers include questioning their own readiness to engage
in social justice practices in life and in the classroom; look to others for guidance and validation;
and will look towards valued others for the best way of teaching or leading social justice
(Polluck et al., 2010; Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Because these knowers are co-
constructing their realities, uncertainty with internal capacity and engaging in conflict are
challenging, making it difficult to address topics of oppression and prejudice (Drago-Severson &
Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Socializing knowers may have the interest to teach for social justice and
the desire to disrupt oppressive systems but haven’t yet built the internal capacity to take a stance
and confidently interrogate social justice teaching into daily instruction. Based on the needs of
the families and the need to disrupt cis-heteronormativity at HCNS, it was important for me to
differentiate the program to meet the needs of teachers who were both instrumental and
socializing knowers.

15

Self-Authoring and Self-Transforming Way of Knowing
While none of my participants in my study were assessed to be self-authoring or self-
transforming knowers, here is what Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2009) say about who
self-authoring and self-transforming knowers are. Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2009)
states, “the move from a socializing to a self-authoring way of knowing involves transitioning
from being made up by someone or something outside of oneself to being able to create and
author one’s own values, ideals, and long-term purpose” (p. 470). Self-authoring knowers have
developed internal capacity to think critically about competing values, engage in conflict
confidently, advocate for justice, and think systematically about larger challenges and their role
in them (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). For minoritized teachers, self-authoring
can support one’s own understanding and love of who they are despite dominant social
conditions and human hierarchy that often damage self-worth. To quote Audre Lorde (1982, as
cited in Drago-Severson & Blum-Destefano, 2017), “if I didn’t define myself for myself, I would
be crunched into other people’s fantasies for me and eaten alive'' (para. 12).
Like self-authoring knowers, self-transforming knowers can take a firm stand for their
values, while recognizing the value of looking beyond themselves to explore a wider spectrum of
ideas and possibilities (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Self- transforming knowers
need others to feel complete, seek out other people with whom they can engage in deep dialogue,
and may be challenged with meeting people where they are (Drago-Severson & Blum-
DeStefano, 2017). Self-transforming knowers can think critically and be transformative in their
work- a long term goal of this study.

16

Transformative Learning Theory
Transformative learning is the process of effecting change in a frame of reference
(Mezirow, 1991). According to Mezirow (1997), “adults have acquired a coherent body of
experience- associations, concepts, values, feelings, conditioned responses- frames of reference
that define their life world; and frames of reference are the structures of assumptions through
which we understand our experiences they selectively shape and delimit expectations,
perceptions, cognition, and feelings” (p.5). TLT examines and changes the way people see
themselves and their world (Brown, 2004). Developed by Mezirow (1978), TLT was influenced
by Khuhn’s (1962) paradigm, Freire’s (1970) conscientization, and Habermas’s (1971, 1984)
domains of learning (Mezirow, 1978, 1991). According to Mezirow (1991), there are three
common themes within transformative learning theory: centrality of experience, critical
reflection, and rational discourse. As noted in the conceptual framework (Figure 1), critical
reflection and rational discourse were two coaching tools used to support teachers in examining
their identities, positionality, disposition, and fear, for the purpose of transforming their practice.
Critical reflection and rational discourse are explained below in the coaching section.
Critical Social Theories
This self-study action research examined the ways in which I can disrupt cis-
heteronormativity through my coaching practice with teachers who teach Black and Latinx
students. Therefore, it was important that this study was informed by critical theories that support
me in the examination of race, gender, and sexual identity markers. The conceptual framework
graphic shows how my work as a coach and coaching program is grounded in Critical Social
Theory (CST). CST comes out of Freire (1994); and is concerned about social transformation,
an awakening of critical consciousness whereby people act against oppression (Brown,
17

2004). Within the CST framework, teachers are activists who share power with marginalized
groups, teaching others to act politically and to advocate for themselves and other marginalized
groups (Freire, 1994; Brown, 2004). Freire’s work informs the foundation of my coaching
practice. Through a transformative learning process, grounded in CST, I focused on supporting a
teacher’s understanding of their own positionality and power, with a goal of helping them shift
their teaching practice to one that advocates for justice and equity and disrupts systems and
structures of oppression, in order to create safe and affirming conditions for their students. It was
important for me to also examine my positionality, through critical reflection, awaken critical
consciousness, and learn to advocate for myself and others through my coaching practice. The
CST framework informed my coaching practice and the ways I support teachers.
Queer Theory and Critical Race Theory (CRT) are both subsets of Critical Social
Theory. Because this study centers racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students, I thought it to be
crucial to ground my coaching practice and the teacher’s learning experience in both Queer
Theory and CRT. I began the study with a more nuanced examination of the intersectionality of
race and gender and sexual orientation, and how those things converge and must be attended to.
However, race did not rise to the level of priority in conversations; but I do still contend that
because HCNS serves solely racially marginalized students, and the majority of staff are BIPOC,
my study remains grounded in both Queer Theory and CRT.
Queer Theory
Queer theory examines all human behaviors and insists that all sexual behaviors and
identities are social constructs (Gamson, 2000). Stemming from CST, queer theory questions and
challenges the operation of heteronormativity and gender and sexual binaries (Misawa,
2010). Cis-heteronormativity can be defined as a societal hierarchy that privileges individuals
18

based on presumed binaries of gender and sexuality, creating what is normative in society
(Jackson, 2006; Oswald et al., 2005). Queer theory helps to examine the gender and sexuality
norms embedded in daily experiences of children and youth, allowing for the presence of
identities that traditionally have been erased or seen as not normal (Oswald et al., 2005). Queer
theory can be used to provide a rationale for schools to require curriculum, policies, and
practices that are inclusive of sexual minority students and their experiences (Loutzenheiser &
MacIntosh, 2004; Rofes, 1995). Queer theory helped me to understand barriers that are in the
way of me becoming transformative in the work that I do; whether they are barriers I place on
myself or ones that systems place on me. Queer theory also helped ground the concepts,
strategies, and activities used in my group coaching program to help teachers disrupt cis-
heteronormativity at HCNS.
Critical Race Theory
According to Lawrence et al. (1993), Critical Race Theory (CRT) asserts that race creates
hierarchical categories that influence power relations among different racial groups; and that race
is an important aspect in social constructions of today’s society and in human development
(Ladson-Billings, 2002). Delgado and Stefancic (2001) discuss the use of CRT in academia,
explaining that “CRT movement is a collection of activists in society and scholars in education
interested in researching and transforming the relationships shared by race, racism, and power”
(p. 2). CRT scholars have established six important themes: 1) it recognizes that racism is
endemic to American life; 2) it expresses skepticism toward dominant claims of neutrality,
objectivity, color blindness, and meritocracy; 3) it challenges ahistoricism and insists on a
contextual/historical analysis of the law; 4) it insists on recognition of the experiential
knowledge of people of color and their communities of origin in analyzing law and society; 5) it
19

is interdisciplinary and borrows from liberalism, law and society, feminism, Marxism,
poststructuralism, critical legal theory, pragmatism, and nationalism; and 6) it works toward the
end of eliminating racial oppression as part of the broader goal of ending all forms of oppression
(Lawrence et al., 1993, p.6). Lastly, CRT helps racially marginalized people to articulate their
position in society and disrupt the systems and structures in place that are oppressive and
inequitable. It informed my work by helping me to understand the intersections of race, gender,
and sexuality. Working with a predominantly BIPOC staff in a school community that serves
Black and Latinx students, it’s important for me to understand the cultural implications of how
homophobia and transphobia impact communities of color. CRT also helps me understand the
impact whiteness and white supremacy has on gender and sexuality as social constructs. I believe
education is a path to liberation. Liberation needs to be attainable to all people of color, not just
those who are cis and straight. Therefore, it is important to decenter whiteness and focus on
people of color in order to work towards the liberation of all people. I kept this in mind, when
coaching my three-month program.
Queer Race Pedagogy
Queer Race Pedagogy (QRP) is a teaching approach birthed from Queer Theory and
Critical Race Theory (Misawa, 2010). Designed specifically for racially marginalized LGBTQ+
students, QRP is a holistic tool that supports the creation of a learning environment that focuses
on the intersections of race, gender, and sexuality. QRP asserts that educators must try to
examine, and address issues related to racial and gender identity, sexuality, sociocultural issues,
power dynamics, and equity amongst historically marginalized populations within their teaching
practice (Misawa, 2010). Creating and implementing a group coaching session focused on using
20

critical reflection and rational discourse helped me support teachers to be prepared to examine
and address issues related to gender identity and sexuality within their teaching practice.
Through QRP’s two major pedagogical activities, counter-storytelling and examining
stereotypes in terms of positionality (Misawa, 2010), my goal was to support teachers in learning
to shift their teaching practice to disrupt heteronormativity and cultivate safe and affirming
conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students. Through counter storytelling, it was
argued that participants of the study would learn to tell their own stories based on their
experiences with identities, countering stories constructed from stereotypes and bias. Through
examining stereotypes by developing and using critical thinking skills, Misawa (2010) believes
people will learn how to use pedagogy and power as educators and learners in more inclusive
ways. However, because fear was unearthed as a major internal barrier for all eight participants, I
decided to modify the coaching program to focus on using critical reflection and rational
discourse as examination tools and did not facilitate counter-storytelling and examining
stereotype activities, as planned. However, QRP helped inform my coaching practice, and if the
program was extended (past three months), I would facilitate both counter-storytelling and
examining stereotype activities in the next iteration of the program.
Coaching
Coaching is one of the fastest growing forms of professional development in the United
States of America right now (Darling-Hammond et al., 2009); and involves teachers working
with a colleague with more expertise and experience in a certain subject, skill, or area of focus in
order to improve instructional practices (Campbell & Malkus, 2011). Several studies have shown
that instructional coaching is correlated with an increase in teacher efficacy (Cantrell & Hughes,
2008), and improvements in teaching (Neuman & Cunningham, 2009). Coaches support teachers
21

in addressing problems of practice by engaging in activities that focus on key disciplinary ideas,
how students learn those ideas, and pedagogical principles to support students’ learning (Coburn
and Russel, 2008).
According to Gibbons and Cobb (2017), characteristics of high-quality coaching
professional development include: intensive and ongoing opportunities for teachers; a focus on
problems teachers encounter daily; a focus on student thinking; development of community and
common professional discourse; and opportunities to both investigate and enact specific routines
and practices. In this action research study, teachers were provided with bi-monthly small group
coaching sessions (a total of six sessions) that are grounded in these characteristics of high-
quality coaching; and focus on two main interventions: critical reflection and rational
discourse. My goal was to pay attention to my delivery and use of facilitation and coaching tools
like questioning, modeling, feedback, analysis of and reflection on the learner’s experience
(Trivette et al., 2009; Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). I used critical reflection and
rational discourse as coaching strategies, to help teachers explore developmental factors-
identity, positionality, and disposition- and explore the impact of fear on a teacher’s practice of
disrupting cis-heteronormativity and creating safe and affirming conditions for students.
Critical Reflection
Critical reflection is the first coaching intervention that will be used in the coaching
program, as noted in the conceptual framework visual. For learners to transform their
perspectives, they must engage in critical reflection (Brookfield, 1995). Mezirow (1998) asserts
that adult learning occurs in four ways- elaborating existing frames of reference, learning frames
of reference, transforming points of view, and transforming habits of mind; and critical reflection
is a component of all four. Mezirow (1998) argued that the overall purpose of adult development
22

is to realize one’s agency through expanding awareness and critical reflection; and that the
learning tasks of critical reflection involves helping adults become aware of oppressive structures
and practices, developing awareness of how they might change these, and building the
confidence and ability to work for collective change (Brown, 2004). As Brookfield (1995)
asserts, “critical reflection is the sustained and intentional process of identifying and checking
the accuracy and validity of our teaching assumptions” (p. 3). Realizing one’s agency (Mezirow,
1998), developing awareness of oppressive structures and building the ability to work for
collective change (Brown, 2004), and examining assumptions (Brookefied, 1995) through
critical reflection, supports teachers in working towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity and
creating safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students.
Guided by Brookfield’s (2017) book, Becoming A Critically Reflective Teacher, I taught
teachers what critical reflection is and how to use it in practice to help process their positionality
and practices and work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity to create safe and affirming
conditions in their classroom. I taught teachers the difference between a descriptive,
comparative, and critical reflection (Jay & Johnson, 2002) and taught them about power and
hegemony, prescriptive, paradigmatic and causal assumptions (Brookfield, 2017), and
perspective taking (Mezirow, 1991); and had them write critical reflections, with prompts, during
each coaching session. I also used critical reflection prompts as a tool to analyze my own
practice in order to help modify and revise the program in real time.
Rational Discourse
Rational discourse is the second intervention used during the coaching
program. Grounded in TLT, rational discourse, according to Mezirow (1991), assesses the
validity of one’s construction of meaning. Transformation is promoted and developed through
23

rational discourse (Brown, 2004). Mezirow (1996) described seven conditions for rational
discourse: “have accurate and complete information, be free from coercion and distorting self-
conception, be able to weigh evidence and assess arguments objectively, be open to alternate
perspectives, be able to reflect critically on presuppositions and their consequences, have equal
opportunity to participate, and be able to accept informed, objective, and rational consensus as a
legitimate test of validity” (p. 78). Taylor (2000) also suggests that establishing a sense of
bravery, openness and trust is also essential to helping a group participate in rational discourse.
Because I was limited to a three-month study, the six-session coaching program focused on 1)
establishing a sense of bravery, openness, and trust (Taylor, 2000), and 2) providing access to
accurate information about cis-heteronormativity and its pervasiveness in schools in order to help
participants develop an emerging understanding (Mezirow, 1996). My initial intention was to
define each of the seven conditions for participants, ask specific questions related to the
condition to explore and expand our understanding as a group, and have participants describe
what the condition may look like or how it may show up within their role at the school.
However, it was quite ambitious to try and teach and develop the seven conditions for rational
discourse within three months. Instead, I focused the coaching session on establishing a sense of
bravery, openness and trust and providing access to accurate information about cis-
heteronormativy. I also focused on creating opportunities for both reflection and discourse
between participants, through different activities and prompts, giving them space and practice to
participate in rational discourse.
I also attempted, in the second part of the coaching program, to trigger a disorienting
dilemma for the participants. The process of adult learning begins with individuals motivated to
solve a problem (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999); and disorienting dilemmas, the initiation of a
24

transformative learning experience usually highlighting a crisis that triggers a questioning of
assumptions, can be used to facilitate transformative learning (Mezirow, 1990). I attempted to
facilitate an activity that was meant to prompt a disorienting dilemma, however it turned out to
be an activity that triggered a sense of urgency instead. However, through creative writing,
discussion prompts and questions, small group activities, and critical media activities,
participants explored cis-heteronormativity through the examination of their own personal and
professional positionality, pulling on their own experiences from child to adulthood. Through the
discussion of experiences and activities, participants examined their fear, positionality, and
practice.
Teacher Developmental Factors
As noted in the conceptual framework visual, a teacher’s identity, positionality, and
disposition are factors of teacher development that influenced and were influenced by the
coaching process. Because this was a self-study action research, human factors such as identity,
positionality, disposition, and fear played an important role in influencing the action/reflection
cyclical process. For example, as teachers began to critically reflect on their identity,
positionality, and disposition, fear emerged as a major internal barrier. It was important for me,
as a coach, to acknowledge and address their fear in order to help them move from paralysis to
action. In this subsection, I further define these developmental factors, and discuss how these
factors were important to address within the context of this study.
Identity
There has been interest in the role identity plays in teacher development (Boylan &
Woolsey, 2015). Recently, research has identified identity as a concept in relation to social
justice and teaching practices (Freitas, 2008). As researchers suggest, social justice is an
25

ambiguous term and one with multiple meanings. Therefore, Boylan and Woolsey (2015) use the
term social justice identity to discuss a teacher’s relationship to social justice beliefs and
principles. Since cis-heteronormativity is a social justice issue, it was important for me to explore
identity through a social justice lens. A teacher’s intersectional identities may influence their
social justice teaching beliefs. A teacher’s relationship to teaching for social justice is rooted in
their personal histories which provide resources for and also limitations to the development of
their practice (Boylan & Woolsey, 2015). I learned that coaching teachers to examine their
identity allowed them to use a critical lens to critique their own teaching practices. I also learned
that a teachers’ identity impacted the way fear influenced their practice, and also their level of
knowledge of cis-heteronormativity. Therefore, identity played a huge role in helping me modify
and differentiate the coaching program.
Positionality
This study looks at the role I played in supporting teachers to reflect on their positionality
and teaching practices in order to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity in their
classroom. My assumption, based on research, was that how a teacher is positioned— based on
identity and disposition—impacts their capacity to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe
and affirming conditions. Therefore, it was important for me to coach teachers to reflect on their
positionality for the purpose of transformative learning. Douglas and NGANGA (2015) explore
positionality and discuss Villaverde’s (2008) definition in their article, What’s Radical Love Got
To Do With It: Navigating Identity, Pedagogy and Positionality in Pre-Service Education.
Villaverde (2008) defines positionality as “how one is situated through the intersection of power
and the politics of gender, race, class, sexuality, ethnicity, culture, language, and other social
factors.” In order to understand one’s positionality, a teacher must take a self-reflexive approach
26

in examining their own identities, beliefs, and stances; and this requires teachers to consider their
own position, particularly when speaking, and how various positionalities relate to and
complicate one another (Haritaworn, 2008). Interrogating one’s positionality, therefore, may
bring unconscious bias and belief systems to the surface which have informed professional
practices in the past. Examining one’s positionality also allows for teachers to better understand
the systems from which they benefit from or are oppressed from based on a variance in identity
markers and social location; and how to use their classrooms as spaces to push back and disrupt
these oppressive forces (Martin & Van Gunten, 2002). Examining identity, allowed for teachers
to understand their positionality to disrupt cis-heteronormativity. For example, teachers with cis-
heterosexual privilege learned that it was less risky for them to be disruptive then their LGBTQ+
identifying colleagues, and that it would be important for them to leverage their privilege to
disrupt cis-heteronormativity. I also learned to interrogate my positionality through a critical
reflection process. Examining positionality was a transformative learning experience for both me
and the participants (discussed more in the Findings section).
Disposition
According to Alsup and Miller (2014), dispositions are the context of one’s beliefs,
values, and judgements about all practices related to the teaching profession. Individual
dispositions are demonstrated through both verbal and non-verbal behaviors as educators interact
with students, families, and colleagues (NCATE, 2007). A disposition for social justice promotes
agency and simultaneously strives to disrupt current practices that reproduce social, cultural,
moral, economic, gendered, intellectual, and physical injustices (Alsup & Miller,
2014). Teachers were invited to participate in this three-month study and coaching program
based on interest and a willingness to develop a capacity to disrupt cis-heteronormativity.
27

Therefore, teachers who participated, came into the program with a disposition for social justice.
However, had this been a forced mandated coaching program, where people were not self-
selecting, the issue of disposition would be more of a concern for a coach, and a coach would
have to figure out how to manage teacher pushback because they’re just there and not aligned
with social justice, but for me, that was not an issue because it was a self-selected voluntary
program and so all of them came with the desire to disrupt cis-heteronormativity.
Critical and Transformative Praxis
As displayed in the conceptual framework graphic, critical transformative praxis is a
long-term desired outcome for both me and the teacher participants in this study. Freire (1972)
refers to praxis as the reassertion of human action for a more human world, where changing of
circumstances and self-change occur. Critical and transformative praxis, therefore, includes self-
reflection, reflective action, and collective reflective action. For this study, Drago-Severson and
Blum-DeStefano’s (2017) ways of knowing for social justice framework was used to help
identify a progression from instrumental/socializing to self-authoring/self-transforming way of
knowing to help identify if a practitioner- myself or one of my participants- has developed a
critical and transformative praxis. Within this framework, developing a self-authoring or self-
transforming way of knowing is evidence of a practitioner moving towards the development of a
critical and transformative praxis.
The goal of this self-study action research was to examine and interrogate my coaching
practice with elementary and middle school teachers, with the intention of moving towards the
development of a critical and transformative coaching and leadership praxis. I assert that when a
practitioner, a teacher or coach, moves from a socializing knower to self-authorizing or self-
transforming knower of social justice (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017), they are
28

moving towards developing a critical and transformative praxis. As the literature asserts,
constructivist learning theory and critical social theory can lend to the understanding of how
internal capacities and knowledge of issues of justice and equity impact one’s professional
practice (Mezirow, 1991; Freire 1994; Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Through
using critical reflection as a primary practice to guide my work as an instructional coach, I
examined and shifted internal thoughts, feelings, and conditions that created initial barriers to me
disrupting cis-heteronormativity within my own practice.
The goal of my coaching practice and group coaching program was to support teachers'
work towards the development of a critical and transformative teaching praxis through first
creating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students in their
classroom. As noted on the conceptual framework graphic, a teacher is working towards
developing a critical and transformative teaching praxis when they work on creating safe and
affirming conditions for gender and sexuality development, while specifically centering racially
marginalized LGBTQ+ students. Developing a critical and transformative praxis is a long-term
goal for me and my participants. Within the three-month study, the goal was to focus on helping
teachers learn how to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming conditions in
their classroom.
Safe and Affirming Conditions
Grounded in QRP (Misawa, 2010), safe and affirming conditions refers to the
intentionality in creating spaces of protection, joy, and exploration for LGBTQ+ students of
color. When creating safe and affirming conditions, teachers are intentionality interrogating and
disrupting cis-heteronormativity through the use of queer affirming curriculum and teaching
29

practices, and a focus on an inclusive community that responds appropriately to harm (Misawa,
2010).
Sadowski (2016) reminds us that “safety is a basic prerequisite for schooling- children
and adolescents need to feel and be safe at school in order to learn” (p. 5) and also helps us
imagine not just a ‘better’ school for LGBTQ students, but an ideal educational experience for
them” (p. 74). Along with Arao & Clemens’ (2013) assertion that minoritized people aren’t
afforded safety, it’s important to reimagine safety by affirming the immanent value of all beings.
Therefore, creating safe and affirming conditions is imperative to the transformative work of
building schools ready to sustain the wellness of the communities they serve, teaching racially
diverse students, early on, about the variance in identities, helping them to understand that all
people are worthy of compassion and care.
Conclusion
As discussed and displayed (Figure 1) in the revised conceptual framework, my study
was informed by the theories that sit at the foundation of this study—transformative adult
learning theories (Mezirow, 1991), and critical social theories (Freire, 1994; Oswald et al., 2005;
Lawrence et al., 1993; Ladson-Billings, 2002). My action research focused on the interaction
between me and the teachers, and how I developed a coaching program that used critical
reflection and rational discourse as coaching techniques to help teachers reflect on their identity,
positionality, and disposition, leading to understanding the role fear plays in working towards
disrupting cis-heteronormativity. Through this process, teachers worked towards creating safe
and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students. Simultaneously, this study
examined my coaching practice, using the ways of knowing typology (Drago-Severson & Blum-
DeStefano, 2017) to assess my development of a critical and transformative praxis.
30

Methodology
As a Black and Queer person, I understand the complexities of intersectional identities
and the impact cis-heteronormativity and racism have on an individual’s development. I’ve
cultivated mechanisms from childhood that function as protection from harm. Many of these
mechanisms impact the way I worked as a former teacher and social worker; and the way I work
as a current educational coach. In a professional school setting, I am apt to listen more than share
my ideas and opinions; and stay silent in moments where my voice is needed. As someone who
is committed to social justice and abolitionist practices, it is imperative for me to critically
examine my coaching in a transformative way in order to support teachers who directly teach
and care for our students. I want to do this so that teachers who are LGBTQ+ don’t feel silenced
like I was, and so that students who are or perceived to be LGBTQ+ may find safety and comfort
in their classroom spaces.
In creating a coaching program that supports teachers in the disruption of cis-
heteronormativity, I was able to reflect on the ways that I enable cis-heteronormativity in my
professional coaching practice as a Queer woman. Naming inequities and disrupting harmful
practices within my work has been challenging in the past due to my own internalized
oppression, and it has created barriers in fully supporting teachers in transformative ways. As
referenced in the conceptual framework, Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano’s (2017) four
ways of knowing is a developmental system that focuses on how adults make meaning. With a
focus on social justice, I used this framework to examine my coaching practice. At the beginning
of the program, I placed myself as a socializing knower, using the Drago-Severson and Blum-
DeStefano (2017) framework. As a coach I am driven by my own values and standards for
leading; view conflict as a natural part of advocacy even though it may be very challenging; and
31

can think critically and systematically about my work (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano,
2017). However, I do struggle with taking a firm stance for myself and others in the name of
equity and social justice; and confronting conflict, even when I understand that it is a part of the
work. I hoped to move from a socializing to self-authoring knower as a result of this research
study. However, due to the demands of the coaching program, I focused more on differentiating
the program to meet teacher needs, then focusing on moving myself from one way of knowing to
the next. I still strive to grow and improve different aspects of myself; understand and manage
tremendous complexity; and be more open to critique and expansion (Drago-Severson & Blum-
DeStefano, 2017). I used my current way of knowing as a baseline, to explore my coaching
practice.
The purpose of this study was to critically reflect on my coaching practice, focusing on
the ways I support teachers to reflect on their positionality and teaching practices and to work
towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity. My goal was and continues to be to help teachers
create safe and affirming conditions in their classroom that centers racially marginalized
LGBTQ+ students. The research question guiding this study is: How do I coach teachers to
reflect on their positionalities and teaching practices and to work towards disrupting cis-
heteronormativity by producing safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized
LGBTQ+ students in their classroom?
In this methods section, I discuss the qualitative approach and plan used to develop and
implement my study and the actions associated with it. I discuss the following: 1) participants
and setting, 2) actions taken within the study, 3) data collection and instruments/protocols, 4)
data analysis process, 5) limitations and delimitations, 6) credibility and trustworthiness, and 7)
32

ethics. This section is designed to understand the three-month study in detail to prepare for
discussion of the findings.
Participants and Setting
A purposeful sampling approach to sampling (Patton, 2015), was used in this self-study
action research. Purposeful sampling is “based on the assumption that the investigator wants to
discover, understand, and gain insight and therefore must select a sample from which the most
can be learned” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015, p. 96). This sampling method supported the
qualitative design of my study by allowing me to work with and learn from teachers at HCNS
who are interested in participating in a coaching program meant to help teachers disrupt cis-
heteronormativity and create safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students, while I
examine my own practice as their coach.
Participants
HCNS is a transitional kindergarten through eighth grade charter school. There is a
variance in teacher readiness for transformative work around creating safe and affirming
conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students. For this study, I focused on my coaching
work with a specific small group of teachers. First, I invited all transitional kindergarten through
eighth grade teachers at HCNS to participate in a small group coaching program that would be
offered as professional development provided by the school. Eight people signed up for the
program. My intention was to select a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 9 teachers to participate
in the small group coaching study, leaving room for teachers who may drop out of the coaching
professional development, and as a result, the study. This group made up a unique purposeful
sample for the study, because those who were not committed to this work were not anticipated to
self-select into the coaching program. Once the teachers were selected for the program, I set up
33

initial interviews where I conducted an interview (See Appendix A for interview protocol) and
also administered a questionnaire (See Appendix B) to each participant to determine where they
fall on the Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2009) ways of knowing typology
framework. Some examples of questions that were on the questionnaire included:
● How would you describe your commitment to social justice in your personal life?
● How do you feel about conflict and what’s your comfortability with it?
● How do you feel about critical feedback from colleagues and others in your life?
● Self-reflection in a professional setting is a waste of time. (strongly agree, agree,
disagree, strongly disagree)
● “I have grown the capacity to take responsibility for my own needs, wants, and desires.
(strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
● “I internalize other people’s assessments of me as my own. I want them to think highly
of me” (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
During initial interview process, I collected demographic information of each participant,
including where they fall on the way of knowing typology (Drago-Severson and Blum-
DeStefano, 2017). Table 1 displays key characteristics of each participant.

34

Table 1
Participant Key Characteristics
Pseudonym Pronouns Sexual
Orientation
Race/Ethnicity Type of Knower Grade Level
Michael He/him Straight Black Instrumental 4
th

Tricia She/her Queer Latinx Socializing 4
th

John He/him Straight Filipino Instrumental 3
rd

Holly She/they Bisexual Latinx Socializing 6
th

Christie She/her Straight White/ Palestinian Instrumental 6
th

Joy They/them Queer White Socializing 1
st

Lucas He/him Pansexual Latinx Socializing 6
th

Niko She/her Straight Latinx Instrumental 1
st

I collected data examining my coaching practice and studied a small group (8 participants) in
relation to my practice, to reflect on how I help teachers understand how their own positionality
and teaching practices shapes their ability to produce safe and affirming conditions for racially
marginalized LGBTQ+ students in their classroom. My assumption was that through a process of
critical reflection, I would move from a socializing to a self-authoring way of knowing, working
towards the development of a critical and transformative coaching and leadership praxis, while
teachers develop critical reflection and rational discourse skills to reflect on their positionality
and practices and work towards creating safe and affirming conditions, as noted in the
conceptual framework.
Setting of Action
The setting of the actions was at HCNS, a tk-8 charter school located in Los Angeles,
California because it was also the site in which I was asked to develop this coaching program
35

through a social emotional learning (SEL) grant the school received. At the time of this study,
HCNS had 430 students currently enrolled, 22 full time teachers and 30 full and part-time
staff. The student racial and ethnic demographic make-up was 70% Latinx and 30% Black; and
80% of teachers were women of color. As a coach at HCNS, I worked with a small group of
eight teachers to implement a 3-month coaching program between November 2020 and February
2021. The coaching program was held via Zoom instead of on campus due to the district
mandate and the school’s Covid-19 school closure/remote learning plan. After obtaining
approval from USC’s IRB and receiving permission from the executive director at HCNS, I
invited teachers to participate in the online Zoom sessions as part of the study.
Actions
As outlined in the conceptual framework, I developed a coaching program that focused
on supporting a teachers’ ability to create safe and affirming through implementing two specific
teaching interventions: critical reflection (Brookfield, 1995) and rational discourse (Mezirow,
1991). I led a small coaching group that took place twice a month for three months. A total of 6
coaching sessions were developed and led. The first half of the program (sessions 1-3) focused
on coaching teachers to use critical reflection as a practice to reflect on positionality and teaching
practices. Teacher participants were asked to write a critical reflection journal entry twice a
month during the 3-month study. Examples of critical reflection prompts were as follows:
● Write about your teaching practice; where you are in terms of creating safe and affirming
conditions for your students and how you disrupt cis-heteronormativity, if at all, in your
classroom. Explore the ideas of power dynamics and hegemony.
● How do you feel about talking with your students about gender, and sexuality? Explore
any fears or other emotional barriers that may come up for you.
36

● What have you learned about yourself and your teaching practice throughout the three-
month program? What role does fear now play in disrupting cis-heteronormativity, if at
all?
I spent the first three sessions defining and helping teachers understand what critical
reflections are, how they can support one’s teaching practice, and how to write one. As
Brookfield (1995) suggests, I modeled how to write a critical reflection by sharing one of my
own reflections during the first coaching session. After the first coaching session, teachers were
given instructions on when to write journal entries. Journal entries were supposed to be
submitted to me two days prior to the next coaching session. However, due to a low submission
rate after the first coaching session, I modified the program to have participants write their
critical reflections during the coaching session. Critical reflections were written, discussed, and
deconstructed during 90-minute coaching session.
Along with critical reflections, I also used other writing activities to help teachers focus
on their positionality. During the first coaching session, I modeled and asked participants to write
“I Am From” poems to help them focus on their positionality through exploring intersecting
identities (Klein, 2019). Beginning the first coaching session with the “I Am From” activity, my
hope was that it would allow teachers to get to know themselves and each other in deeper ways
and also set the tone for the three-month program. Given that critical reflection requires an
examination of one’s own identity and positionality, writing their own “I am From” was also
intended to help teachers recognize ways in which their identities positioned them as dominant
and ways in which they positioned them as marginalized. This was intended to facilitate their
critical reflections and facilitate deeper insight into how who they are shapes their teaching
practice.
37

The second half of the program (sessions 4-6) focused on rational discourse, creating the
conditions for transformative discussions. As noted in the conceptual framework, I focused on
establishing a sense of bravery, openness, and trust, and providing accurate and complete
information in order to begin creating the conditions for rational discourse. Through both critical
reflection and rational discourse, teachers examined and explored their own personal identities,
positionality, and political and social location as it relates to their teaching disposition and
practice. As a coach, it is imperative that I focus on problems teachers experience in their daily
work (Putnam & Borko, 2000; Stein et al., 1999; Wilson & Berne, 1999). Therefore, I coached
participants in a group setting, around problems of practice that are related to gender and
sexuality and creating safe and affirming conditions for students. Teachers received feedback
from me as the expert and their peers who were doing the work alongside them. As research
asserts, it’s not just what we do in our classrooms, schools, and districts that matter but also how
we think and feel as educators that makes a big difference in our effectiveness as social justice
practitioners (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Therefore, as a coach, it was
important for me to focus on interrogating, disrupting, and mirroring teacher biases when they
arise in order to support their capacity to do justice work related to gender and sexuality
development in the classroom. As noted in the conceptual framework, both critical reflection and
rational discourse were used as crucial coaching tools within this transformative process.
The coaching program also focused on helping teachers develop a comprehensive
understanding of cis-heteronormativity and how pervasive it is. Informed by QRP, I helped
teachers think about ways that they can disruptive cis-heteronormativity, and how to develop
tangible practices to explore in their classroom. Specific activities can be found in the
instructional guide (See Appendix E). As mentioned in the conceptual framework, QRP is
38

designed for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students who have been left out of mainstream
schooling (Misawa, 2010). QRP supports a teacher in examining and critiquing their own
positionality, in order to address as many issues related to racial identity, gender identity and
expression, and sexual orientation as they can in their practice (Misawa, 2010). My goal was to
specifically teach teachers to use two pedagogical activities in their classroom- counter
storytelling and examining stereotypes by developing and using critical thinking skills. However,
due to the pervasiveness of fear internalized by each participant, I made mid-course corrections
to my coaching program and focused mainly on exploring fear through critical reflection and
discourse. I did, however, modify the program by adding individual coaching sessions and a
resource list to help teachers develop a classroom practice, lesson/activity, or another Spring
“Disruption” Project tool that will be used to facilitate safe and affirming conditions in their
classroom. This artifact was used as data to assess, along with interviews and critical reflections,
takeaways and progress participants experience during the coaching program.
Lastly, since this was an action research study, I also engaged in weekly critical
reflections in order to better understand my practice; modifying and adjusting my coaching as
needed throughout the 3-month study. As noted in my conceptual framework, critical reflection
was used as a tool to help me work towards developing a critical and transformative leadership
praxis.
Data Collection and Instruments/Protocols
Teachers who volunteered to partake in the 3-month small group coaching program that
met for 90 minutes twice a month; and sessions were scheduled in alliance with the school’s
professional development schedule to facilitate the teachers’ participation. Based on my
conceptual framework, critical reflection was a central data collection approach to help cultivate
39

a critical and transformative praxis within my coaching practice and also within the teaching
practice of the eight teacher participants. Session recordings and field notes were used, along
with interviews and artifacts, as data collection tools to enrich the study through triangulation
(Fielding & Fielding, 1986). Triangulation reduces the risk that my assertions will reflect only
the biases of a specific method (Maxwell, 2013). Interviews took place prior to the beginning of
the coaching program and at the end of the program to assess where teachers were in relation to
Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano’s (2017) ways of knowing framework and ask what they
learned as a result of their engagement in the program. The typologies were used to help
differentiate the coaching program and also to indicate where a teacher was situated in the
typology throughout the study. Teacher artifacts (Spring “Disruption” Project) were collected
and used to show what teachers have learned from their experience of my coaching program and
also demonstrate what disruption can look like at different types of ways of knowing.
Documents and Artifacts
Critical reflections helped me create assertions about my practice and that of the teachers
I coach. I digitally wrote critical reflections each week and participants submitted critical
reflections via Google Classroom twice a month during the 3-month study, for a total of 48
participant reflections and 12 self-reflections. As Brookfield (2017) writes in his book, Becoming
a Critically Reflective Teacher, “situating critical reflection in a critical theory tradition leads us
to a focus on two kinds of assumptions: assumptions about power dynamics and what constitutes
a justifiable exercise or abuse of power; and assumptions that seem commonsense and serve us
well but that actually work against our best interests” (p. ix). Within this study, critical reflection
served as not only a data collection tool but also an intervention to help in transforming my
practice as a coach and a participant’s practice as a teacher who disrupts cis-heteronormativity in
40

a school setting that serves Black and Latinx families. I wrote my critical reflections each week
for three months. I created and used a critical reflection protocol that states that I would complete
twelve critical reflections- 10 guided by prompts and 2 free write reflections (See Appendix C).
Jay and Johnson’s (2002) typology was used as guidance to determine if a reflection was critical
or not. Maxwell (2013) asserts that the researcher must engage in writing memos as forms of
reflection, analysis, and self-critique. The critical reflections that I wrote also served as reflective
memos and was a tool to examine my coaching practice throughout the study.
Participants also submitted one work product at the end of the three months that
demonstrated how they plan to disrupt cis-heteronormativity in their classroom. As noted in the
limitation and delimitation section, teacher work products would be collected instead of
observing teachers in their physical classrooms because of Covid-19 remote learning
protocols. This artifact was seen as a window into the teacher’s teaching practice and a way for
me to see if and how safe and affirming conditions were beginning to take place without having
to observe in the physical classroom space. Throughout the three-month coaching program,
teachers were instructed to create a work product. This artifact could be a lesson plan, a student
worksheet or digital activity, or student resource created by the teacher. I was able to use the
artifact to understand and interpret what they’ve learned from coaching and how they plan to
disrupt cis-heteronormativity in the classroom. The artifact was something they started to create
or created within the three-month time period and was shared with me during the second
interview and was implemented either during the program or once the coaching program had
finished.

41

Interviews
Interviews were conducted in order to gather information about a teacher’s identity,
positionality, and disposition as well as their perceptions of their pedagogical practices. Patton
(2015) asserts that interviews are a necessary data collection tool when we can’t observe
behavior, feelings, or a person’s interpretation of the world. Specific to this action research
study, interviews were used to collect information from teacher participants regarding their own
perceptions of their teaching practice, along with their critical examination of their abilities to
create a classroom environment that cultivates safe and affirming conditions for all
students. Through conducting two interviews, taking place at the beginning and end of the
coaching practice, I was able to assess any shift in teachers’ positionality, disposition, and ways
of knowing typology (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Then, I took the data and
examined it in relation to my own coaching practice.
I developed and conducted one-on-one semi-structured interviews with each of the 8
teacher participants, two times within the study, for a total of 16 interviews. The interviews took
place before and after the 3-month coaching program. Each interview lasted 30-45 minutes in
length, with a total of 580 hours of interviews. A semi-structured interview protocol (See
Appendix A) was used to allow space for modification, impromptu questioning, probing and
follow up questioning that cultivate a deeper understanding and helps make meaning from what
participants share. Semi-structured interviews, using an open-ended script that minimizes
indications of research bias, were also be used to increase the study’s trustworthiness (Maxwell,
2013). My goal was to use semi-structured interviews to go deeper into the inquiry process; in
order to best examine and navigate my own coaching practice and support the reflective growth
of each participant. I conducted the interviews myself. There were no real or perceived power
42

dynamics that got in the way of me conducting each interview because I do not hold a
supervisory position (further explained in the ethics section). With the permission of participants,
I also recorded each interview so I could more accurately capture their perspectives. I transcribed
the interviews myself to gather insights and hunches about what is happening within the data
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015), thus allowing me early entry into the analytic process.
Observations
Observational data represent a firsthand experience with the “phenomenon of interest”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). As a researcher who was studying my own practice through self-
study action research, I was the observer and the observed within the coaching sessions I led. In
order to accomplish this, I recorded the Zoom coaching sessions, replayed them, and documented
observational field notes. Participants agreed to be recorded in the Zoom sessions when they
signed consent to participate in the study.
Field notes were used as a data collection tool to examine my practice. I used the
observational field notes to revise my practice in real time, thus conducting in-the-field analysis
during the three-month action cycle. The fieldnotes were then used for more systematic analysis
once the coaching program was completed and I was “out of the field” (discussed below). It was
important for me to be a careful, systematic observer. According to Patton (2015), this includes
“learning how to write descriptively, practicing the disciplined recording of field notes, knowing
how to separate detail from trivia, and using systematic methods to validate and triangulate
observations” (p. 331). My observational field notes allowed me to pay attention to the activities
and interactions during each coaching session. I focused on conversations being held between me
and the participants, examining how they responded to my coaching; who was and was not
talking; and how they were engaging with each other. Field notes included description of setting,
43

people and activities; direct quotations; and “observer comments” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). I
used field notes to construct my weekly critical reflections. Bogdan and Biklen (2011) point out
that groups of people usually want to know what will happen with the observation and findings. I
made it clear to participants that recording of Zoom sessions would be used to help me write
critical reflections and examine my coaching practice, and that they would not be shared with
anyone else, especially their supervisor. Fifteen hours of observational data was collected and
any interactional data that was ultimately used in the reporting was de-identified.
Data Analysis
Because this qualitative action research study was emergent by design, data collection
and analysis were a simultaneous process. This allowed for refining or verifying hunches created
due to lack of prior information related to the study; and without ongoing analysis from the
beginning of data collection, the data might have been unfocused, repetitious, and overwhelming
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Also, because this was an action research study, a research/action
cyclical process, data were collected and analyzed in order to inform my coaching practice in
real time.
Based on the conceptual framework, this study examined my coaching practice grounded
in transformative learning theories and critical social theories. These theories informed the
methods of coaching I used and the interventions and pedagogical practices I taught teachers to
use with each other. They also informed my data analysis process. The data analysis process took
place in stages to help modify my practice. I collected data from interviews at the beginning and
end of the coaching program; and I completed weekly critical reflections and collected bi-
monthly critical reflections from participants. I also recorded each Zoom coaching session, with
participants’ permission, and used field notes to document data from each coaching session. As a
44

common action research practice, I was constantly in a state of data collection and analysis in
order to best examine my coaching practice.
My conceptual framework was used as a guide throughout the study and used to inform a
priori codes. As Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest, I began with a list of codes derived from
the literature, then revised codes as I compared them to actual data. I created a set of a priori
codes based on literature stated in my conceptual framework; and then, after collecting data from
the first interview, prior to the start of the coaching program, I began comparing the a priori
codes to what emerged from the initial interview data. Through reading the transcripts, I created
open codes by jotting down notes, comments, questions, observations (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). I then grouped the comments and notes into similar categories creating axial coding
(Charmaz, 2014; Corbin & Strauss, 2015). I continued this process of open and axial coding
when collecting data from critical reflections; comparing a priori and axial codes to see if there
were collective themes between the data. Through this process, a master list of codes (See
Appendix D), or schemes, was created to reflect the regularities of the study (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). I also thought about and reflected on my own biases that I might have brought into the
study and into the coding process, paying attention to my own positionality and how I might be
guarding my biases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
In interacting with data, it is crucial to use analytic tools or thinking strategies to help
make sense of the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The following analytic tools were used in this
study: asking questions, making comparisons, waving the red flag, and looking at emotions that
are expressed (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). It was important that I asked questions, at every stage of
analysis, to probe, develop provisional answers, think outside the box, and become acquainted
with the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Making comparisons and waving the red flag analytic
45

strategies were also both helpful in examining the findings in relation to my own assumptions,
biases, perspectives to those of my participants in order to fully understand the scope of my
coaching practice (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Lastly, it was important for me to not overlook
feelings and emotions that may arise for myself and participants of the study. According to
Corbin and Strauss (2008), feelings are part of context and are associated with action or inaction;
helping to make meaning.
Through the data analysis process, I continuously checked whether categories derived
from earlier data were still up to par with any subsequent data; and I recorded earlier sets as new
ideas and codes were constructed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). At the end of the three-month
study, the analysis proceeded in a deductive way and focused on final testing and confirmation in
order to formulate assertions that answered the study’s research question. Analytic memos were
used throughout the data analysis process to help me understand and make meaning from what I
was finding, as well as helped me reflect on how my analysis might be shaped by my own biases
and positionality in order to stimulate analytic insight (Maxwell, 2013).
Limitations and Delimitations
It was important that I focused on anticipated limitations and delimitations and express
them clearly. Participants of the study were part of a 3-month coaching program that was not part
of the school’s professional development schedule. The pilot program was something I offered to
a school I’ve worked with in the past. A limitation that came from this is that my action research
study is not part of my work, and my actions were bound to the time frame allotted for the data
collection phase.
Another limitation was because of Covid-19, and remote learning protocols, I was not
able to observe teachers in the physical classrooms and had to observe via Zoom. Therefore, I
46

decided to not include teacher observations as a data collection method. Because of this, I did not
get direct insight into how the teachers develop safe and affirming conditions. This was a
delimitation because I purposefully chose to study artifacts, memos and interviews as my data
collection tools. Therefore, I was dependent on a teacher’s honesty and engagement in the work,
including interviews and critical reflections. This is something I wasn’t able to control or
guarantee. Lastly, my conceptual framework was created by me, and because of this I may have
blind spots or unconscious biases that informed my practice during the three-month
study. Maxwell (2013) asserts that conceptual frameworks illuminate a study but also keep
certain things in the dark.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Understanding is the primary rationale for a qualitative research study; therefore,
objective truth or reality will not be captured (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). This subsection
discusses a set of interventions to increase the credibility of my research study. Triangulation, the
use of multiple methods and sources of data, was used within the study (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). Critical reflections, interviews, and teacher work products, along with my own critical
reflection memos and observational field notes from the Zoom coaching sessions, were used as
data collection mechanisms. Patton (2015) states, “triangulation, in whatever form, increases
credibility and quality by countering the concern (or accusation) that a study’s findings are
simply an artifact of a single method, a single source, or a single investigator’s blinders” (p.
674). What I read in critical reflections was checked against interview answers and teacher work
products. Data were also cross-checked through observation field notes and my own critical
reflection/memos.
47

Member checking and reflexivity were also used to increase credibility. Member
checking is the process of eliciting feedback from participants on initial findings to rule out the
possibility of misinterpreting meaning and identifying my own biases and misunderstandings
found in the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Because this was a self-study, I was very aware and
critical in understanding my own assumptions, barriers, and biases that may impact my coaching
practice. Therefore, it may be easy for me to misinterpret meaning from participants during the
data collection process. Member checking helped me decipher my interpretation of how I
interpret the data. Throughout the three-month data collection process, I brought initial analysis
to participants to see if they were able to recognize their experience in my interpretation
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Additionally, through the use of reflective memos I was able to be reflexive; analyzing
and being transparent about my assumptions, worldview, biases, theoretical orientation, and my
relationship to the study and how they may affect the investigation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). I
have a major assumption that all educators should cultivate racial, gender, and sexuality
development through curating experiences in the classroom from a very early age. I am often
frustrated with educators who feel differently. I strive to be transformative in my worldview. I
also have been conditioned to internalize anti-Black, homophobic and transphobic
biases. Through reflective memoing, I paid attention to and documented how these biases and
assumptions showed up in relation to this study.

48

Ethics
Action research is an emergent process which moves through cycles of action and
reflection (Coughlan, 2019), making it difficult to map out ethical considerations in advance
(Morton, 1999; Walker & Halett, 2002). It is very important that this study developed a set of
guidelines that focus on relationships amongst those participating in or affected by the research;
that ethics were integrated into each stage of the action research cycle in order to inform
decision-making; and center transparency amongst all stakeholders (Boser, 2006). One ethical
issue that could have arisen was the lack of attention around making a clear distinction between
engaging in action research and reporting on action research (Coughlan, 2019). Therefore, it was
imperative that I used confidentiality when writing my critical reflections and reporting
findings. I kept participant identities confidential and created community agreements with
participants to keep confidentiality within the group. Even though I am studying my own
coaching practice, it was crucial for me to collaborate and negotiate in ways where participants
own the rights to findings as much as I do as the researcher (Coughlan, 2019). It was beneficial
for me to continuously ask for consent from participants and the school administration
throughout the research journey as it evolved and changed. Participants were also able to drop
out of the study at any moment. Therefore, my intention was to elicit 6-9 participants in the study
to still have a sufficient number of participants. Eight people participated in the study and no one
dropped out.
I have worked at HCNS, in different capacities, for over a decade. I have different
relationships with different people depending on the role of my position. As a teacher and a
school social worker I was perceived as a peer to my colleagues. When I took on a director and
supervisory role for the school’s social and emotional support program, counselors, teachers and
49

other staff members began to see me in a guidance or consulting role. Because of the supportive
and confidential nature of this role, teachers did not and still do not perceive me to be aligned
with the executive director. I’ve been able to create a space where I am well trusted by all staff
members. I anticipated this perception to transfer over to my role as a coach and researcher of
this study. However, Glesne (1999) asserts there are multiple kinds of relationships that might
enter into qualitative research; therefore, it is important to not hide behind the mask of rapport or
the wall of professional distancing. As a qualitative researcher, I was fully authentic in my
interactions with my participants and “honored the consequences of acting with genuineness”
(Glesne, 1999, p. 105), highlighting the necessity of remaining reflexive (Dwyer & Buckle,
2009).
Findings
In this section, I present my findings to the following research question: How do I coach
teachers to reflect on their positionalities and teaching practices and to work towards disrupting
cis-heteronormativity by producing safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized
LGBTQ+ students in their classroom? This chapter will be divided into two parts: 1) action and
reaction, and 2) areas of growth and reflection. In the first part, I discuss the actions I took and
the changes I made to coach teachers to reflect on their positionalities and teaching practices.
This section also discusses progress made towards working with teachers to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity by producing safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+
students in their classroom. In part two, I discuss my reflection on my areas of growth as a coach
and school leader. The data used to inform the findings include my own action research critical
reflections, interviews with teachers, coaching session transcripts/observations, and participant
critical reflections.

50

Part 1: Action and Reaction
Through my action research, I was able to create and implement a six-session small
group coaching program that focused on using critical reflection and rational discourse as
strategies to explore, interrogate, and process a teacher’s positionality and teaching practice. The
aim of this coaching program was to coach teachers to work towards disrupting cis-
heteronormativity by producing safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+
students. I chose to use the initial interviews to gather information about each participant, learn
where they fall on the Four Ways of Knowing Typology (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano,
2017), and gather information that would inform how I designed each coaching session. While I
had an initial plan in mind for the six-week program, sessions were designed as I learned more
about the teachers and how far we could get in the allotted time. I would create a session, lead
the session, reflect on the session, and then create the next session. I used the informal in-the-
field analysis of my critical reflections and information I learned from each session to inform my
next session.
Using this action research approach allowed me to course correct and differentiate as
needed, paying attention to contextual constraints, teacher needs, and internal barriers. I realized,
early on, through examining our discourse and participant reflection, that participants a) were
stuck because of fear, and b) had different knowledge about cis-heteronormativity based on their
own identities and experiences. I came to understand that unless I addressed their fears and
differentiated based on their knowledge, I would not be able to coach teachers toward creating
safe and affirming conditions for students. Therefore, I took a step back and restructured the
coaching program to meet participant needs in order to ultimately help them work towards
disrupting cis-heteronormativity in the classroom.
51

Finding 1: Coaches Must Understand and Address Teacher Fear
When I embarked on this coaching program and action research project, I did expect for
fear and discomfort to come up as a challenge, but I did not expect for fear to create paralysis. In
his book Deep Learning, Jon Wergin cites Kegan and Lahey who argue that emotions bring
about an “immunity to change” and that we have a psychological immune system that is
designed to reduce anxiety (Wergin, 2019). I realized that unless I addressed their fears and
helped teachers work through their paralysis, I wouldn’t be able to coach teachers toward
creating safe and affirming classrooms for LGBTQ+ students. In this section I discuss the
importance of understanding and addressing teacher fear.
Understanding Teacher Fear
I learned that teacher fear, which varied based on identity, greatly influences a teacher’s
capacity to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity in the classroom. I found that through
reflection on their positionality, all teachers realized they were experiencing deep seated fear that
was stopping them from disrupting cis-heteronormativity in the classroom. Internalized fear
based on gender and sexual orientation, along with anticipation of parent pushback exacerbated
by distance learning and perceived lack of administrative support, played the biggest roles in fear
paralysis.
Internalized Fear Based on Gender and Sexual Orientation. Gender and sexual
identity factors shaped the way fear showed up for teachers. I noticed, by examining the data,
that all four teachers who identified as LGBTQ+ feared potential harm and being “outed” for
disrupting cis-heteronormativity, and teachers who were straight and cis-gender were afraid of
not knowing enough about LGBTQ+ education to teach their students. For example, one teacher,
Joy, who identifies as Queer and nonbinary, stated in their first critical reflection, “I think that
52

being Queer and nonbinary and pretty deep in the language both puts me at ease because I can
trust how I’ll frame and respond to things and it also fills me with fear that I will be outed or
harmed.” In this statement, Joy acknowledged a juxtaposition of being Queer and non-binary and
a teacher. They are conflicted because their Queerness has taught them a lot about LGBTQ+
identity and language that makes them confident in the content, however, despite knowing how
to talk with students and teach them inclusive language, they are still fearful of being “outed” or
harmed.
Fear manifested differently for the four straight teacher participants. For example,
Christie, a straight cis-gender woman stated in her initial interview,
Honestly, I don’t feel equipped to have real in-depth conversations with my students
about gender and sexuality and that causes a lot of fear. Because of this fear, I generally
keep it generic and talk about acceptance of others despite any differences. I recognize
that I am privileged in the sense that my sexuality aligns with society’s views, and my
gender, although deemed to be less valuable than a cis white male, also aligns with
society’s norm. Therefore, it is easy for me to avoid dealing with issues that don’t
directly affect me. This has impacted why I’ve chosen to not teach LGBQ+ education in
the past.
This reflection shows that fear exists in a way that is different from the first example. In this
example, Christie acknowledged not only her fear, but also her privilege as a cis-heterosexual
woman who can easily “avoid dealing with issues that don’t directly affect” her. Having the
privilege to avoid, but now choosing to not avoid cis-heteronormativity, produced a level of fear
that she has not felt before. However, the similarity in these two teachers is that both had the
desire to push through their fears in order to not do a “disservice” to their students, pointing to
53

the fact that even motivated teachers who voluntarily take part in a coaching program like the
one I designed can struggle with how to move past the fear in ways that disrupt cis-
heteronormativity in their classroom. What these examples demonstrate is that fear was
expressed as a barrier by all eight participants, regardless of identity. However, fear does look
different based on one’s identity. After reviewing data from the initial interview and first set of
participant critical reflections, I realized it would be important to use both critical reflection and
rational discourse as strategies to help teachers process and understand their fear in order to
move through any paralysis. While critical reflection and rational discourse were part of my
initial conceptual framework, the addition of a focus on fear was a new addition.
Teacher Fear of Parent Pushback and Lack of Administrative Support. Teachers
were most fearful of parent pushback, which was exacerbated by distance learning and lack of
administrative support. Religion, cultural factors, and social conditioning greatly impact a
parent’s view on LGBTQ+ education being taught in school (DePalma & Jennett, 2010). At the
time of this study, many of the families at HCNS were conservative and religious, and therefore
believed LGBTQ+ education should not be taught in school. Due to Covid-19, teachers taught
virtually, bringing their “classroom” into the student’s home. Out of 54 statements about fear,
across data sources from teachers, 21 statements noted that fear of parent pushback was
heightened by distance learning. Therefore, when coaching teachers to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity by creating safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students, it is
important to understand the level and context of the fear that is present for each teacher, and how
this fear manifests differently in order to meet their coaching needs.
Teachers also felt as if they were in a very vulnerable position because the school
administration did not have a policy, protocol, or plan in place to protect teachers from parent
54

pushback. Therefore, teachers perceived there to be a lack of administrative support, even though
the school has put training and coaching in place that supports teachers in creating safe and
affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students. Teachers noted, 14 times throughout the 3-month
period, that there was a lack of support for teachers, and that they did not feel confident that they
would be supported if parent pushback occurred. One teacher mentioned in their second critical
reflection,
I think one of the reasons I haven’t addressed issues around cis-heteronormativity in the
classroom is because I’m afraid of pushback from parents. I don’t know how much
support there will be from school leadership, so I just avoid these issues all together.
This example shows that contextual factors, along with internal factors, impact teacher fear of
disrupting cis-heteronormativity in their classroom. Understanding teacher fear allowed for me to
modify my use of critical reflection and radical discourse to address teacher fear, helping
teachers to move through paralysis and work towards transforming the way they create safe and
affirming conditions for their students by disrupting cis-heteronormativity.
Addressing Fear Through Critical Reflection
After analysis of initial interviews and the first coaching session, I decided to
differentiate my coaching to address teacher fear of being harmed, outed, not knowing enough,
and parent pushback, to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity and creating safe and
affirming conditions in their classroom. Listening to the teachers (through the data), I changed
the coaching curriculum to focus on the interrogation of not only their positionality and practices
as I had originally proposed, but also the fear that stops them from disrupting cis-
heteronormativity in their classroom. Taylor (2000) states, “affective learning, the role of
emotions and feelings in making meaning, were found to be essential to transformative
55

processes, particularly the fostering of critical reflection” (p. 22). Therefore, I modified the
program by adding reflection time to the coaching sessions, revising critical reflection prompts to
address fear, and focusing on coaching teachers how to use critical reflection as a tool to help
teachers understand, process, and learn from the emotional fear that was creating barriers to
cultivating safe and affirming conditions in the teacher’s classroom.
Modifying Program to Add Critical Reflection During Coaching Sessions. My initial
plan was to teach critical reflection strategies during coaching sessions, and then have teachers
critically reflect on their own, between sessions. After the first coaching session, only five out of
eight participants completed and submitted their critical reflections. According to Reid (2016),
critical reflection requires time and often teachers aren’t provided the time to critically reflect on
themself and their teaching practice. I realized that I needed to allow time for teachers to reflect
during the coaching sessions, when they had already dedicated the time to their
learning. Therefore, after all subsequent sessions following session one, I had teachers turn off
their camera and spend 20-30 minutes answering the critical reflection prompts that aligned with
each coaching session topic. After critically reflecting, teachers would then be invited to share
their reflections with the group. Allowing time during the coaching sessions to critically reflect
assured that all participants were completing their critical reflections, which I argued in
alignment with Brookfield (2017), is critical to learning. With this modification, when doing the
program again, I would allot 2 hours instead of 90 minutes to each coaching session, providing
time for in session reflection and discourse.
During the last five sessions, all eight participants completed the five expected critical
reflections that were assigned during each session. Talking about one’s fear is challenging and
requires vulnerability and time. Because teachers were not already in a habit of critically
56

reflecting, allowing time and space for reflection, during each coaching session, better positioned
teachers to learn how to use critical reflection as a tool to process and understand one’s fear.
Modifying Program by Revising Critical Reflection Teacher Prompts. Another way I
changed my initial plan, to address fear, was revising the initial teacher critical reflection
prompts. In a reflection I wrote after the first coaching session, I explored how it would be
important for me to help teachers process fear through critical reflections. I wrote,
Fear is such a paralyzing emotion! I’ve realized that through my own experience with
fear. What I believe to be true is that if my goal is to help them be disruptive in their
classroom, to work toward creating safe and affirming conditions, then I need to help
teachers deeply understand their fear. I need for them to understand what fear is for them,
how it shows up in their life, and how they perceive it to impact the work they do and the
life they live. I did not believe fear to play such an integral role when I was writing
critical reflection prompts for teachers. Therefore, none of the prompts addressed fear. I
need to change that. It will be imperative for teachers to learn to use critical reflections to
process their fear to help move through paralysis.
This reflection excerpt demonstrates how I came to the decision to modify the
teacher’s critical reflections to focus on fear and its impact. From this reflection, I decided to
have participants reflect on fear during the second half of the program (sessions 4-6). Table 2
shows the question prompts I was planning on using and the prompts I chose to use.

57

Table 2
Critical Reflection Prompts (Original and Revised)
Initial Prompts Revised Prompts
Session 1 Write about your teaching practice; where you
are in terms of creating safe and affirming
conditions for your students and how you
disrupt cis-heteronormativity, if at all, in your
classroom. Explore the ideas of power
dynamics and hegemony.
No Change
Session 2 How is your reality similar and different from
the realities of your students? Explore deeply
the ideas of identity, positionality, and
assumptions, etc. in relation to race, gender, and
sexuality.
No Change
Session 3 What is a class practice that cultivates safety
and affirming conditions in your classroom?
Who, specifically, does this practice support?
Who might it leave out? What class practice do
you want to add this school year that will help
cultivate safe and affirming conditions? What
do you need to be able to do this?
No Change
Session 4 How do you feel about talking with your
students about gender, and sexuality? What
comes up for you?
How do you feel about talking with your students
about gender, and sexuality? Explore any fears
or other emotional barriers that may come up for
you.
Session 5 How would you create and/or how do you
create safe and affirming conditions for your
students? Reflect on your own identity,
positionality, and disposition in relation to
creating safe and affirming conditions for
students.
How would you create and/or how do you create
safe and affirming conditions for your
students? Reflect on your own identity,
positionality, and disposition, along with any fear
that may arise in relation to creating safe and
affirming conditions for students.
Session 6 How has your practice changed throughout the
last three months, and what evidence do you
have?
What have you learned about yourself and your
teaching practice throughout the three-month
program? What role does fear now play in
disrupting cis-heteronormativity, if at all?

As noted in the revised prompt for session six, I scaled back my intention from practice change
in teachers’ classroom to a more generalized learning about self and teaching practice. When
focusing on fear, it became less about implementing and changing teaching practices as an
outcome of the program, and more about understanding and interrogating fear in a way that helps
one move through paralysis. Being able to critically reflect on fear, while also interrogating one’s
positionality and teaching practices, allowed for teachers to take a deeper look into internalized
58

barriers that may lead to paralysis or resistance when attempting to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity.
Coaching Teachers to Use Critical Reflection. My initial goal was to instruct teachers
to use critical reflection as a tool to understand their positionality and teaching practice and work
toward disruption. Critical reflection is a transformative learning strategy (Mezirow, 1991); and
transformative strategies are needed to support teachers in disruption. To create safe and
affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students in their classroom, teachers need to critically reflect
on their positionality, teaching practices, and also fear to transform their practice, ultimately
working to disrupt cis-heteronormativity. Critical reflection involves examining one’s own
thoughts, feelings, and actions and their impact on both the self and the people we work and
interact with (Reid, 2016). If I expected teachers to critically reflect on their positionality,
teaching practices, and the fear that interferes with working towards cis-heteronormative
disruption, I needed to directly teach what critical reflection is and how to use it, model using my
own critically reflective practice as an example and provide feedback to help them develop their
critical reflection practice. These are common means of assisted performance (Tharp &
Gallimore, 1989).
Direct Instruction. The teachers who participated in the coaching group did not have
experience with critical reflection. This was a new concept for all participants. Brookfield (2017)
asserts the importance of focusing on direct instruction as a teaching strategy when students are
novices; and cognitive structuring can be used as a means of assistance to learn new concepts
(Tharp & Gallimore, 1989). I spent a part of the first three sessions directly teaching participants
what critical reflection is, how to identify if a reflection is critical, and when and how to
critically reflect as a strategy to transform one’s teaching practice to provide cognitive
59

structuring (Tharp & Gallimore, 1989). In session one, I introduced a typology of reflection that
focuses on three dimensions of reflection- descriptive, comparative, and critical (Jay & Johnson,
2002), giving examples of each dimension, highlighting what makes a reflection critical. During
the first session, I also discussed Brookfield’s (2017) assertion that critical reflection illuminates
power and uncovers hegemony. In session two, I taught teachers the different types of
assumptions that influence our decisions and actions. Teachers learned three types of
assumptions- prescriptive, paradigmatic, and causal (Brookfield, 2017). During the third session,
teachers learned about Mezirow’s (1991) idea of perspective taking. Teachers learned how to use
critical reflection to interrogate familiar perspectives, looking at ideas, events, and experiences in
a different way (Brookfield, 2017). Table 3 demonstrates how I introduced each critical
reflection concept to the coaching group.

60

Table 3
Critical Reflection Concept Introduction
Critical Reflection Concepts Taught Direct Instruction Example of What I Said
Session 1 Descriptive, Comparative, and
Critical Typology Reflection (Jay &
Johnson, 2002)
We can use Jay and Johnson’s Typology of reflection to
help us learn how to write different types of reflections, and
also as a guide to assess if your reflection is critical or not.
Let’s go over the typology worksheet together, and then I
will share excerpts from different reflections, and you all
will try to identify if it is a descriptive, comparative, or
critical reflection based on the typology description.
Session 1 Illuminating Power and Hegemony
(Brookfield, 2017)
In the book, Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher,
Brookfield asks the questions, what makes reflection
critical? He says that reflection has two distinct purposes: to
illuminate power and uncover hegemony. After we learn
what illuminating power and uncovering hegemony looks
like in a critical reflection, we’re going to each think of a
time when power dynamics showed up in your classroom
and think of an assumption or practice that seems to make
your life easier but actually works against your interest.
Session 2 Prescriptive, Paradigmatic, and
Causal Assumptions (Brookfield,
2017)
Today we are going to talk about assumptions, and how to
unearth our assumptions through critical reflections.
Brookfield identifies that there are three types of
assumptions. The first assumption is paradigmatic
assumptions. These assumptions are used to put the world in
categories. An example of a paradigmatic assumption is
“student’s behavior will change if they are punished.” The
next assumption is a prescriptive assumption. These are
assumptions we think should happen in a particular
situation. An example of this type of assumption is
“teachers should center student voices”. he third
assumption is a causal assumption. These are assumptions
about how different parts of the world work and about the
conditions under which these can be changed. An example
of this assumption is “using learning contracts increases
students’ self-directedness.” We’re going to explore these
three assumptions more by doing a jigsaw activity.
Session 3 Perspective Taking (Mezirow, 1991) One thing that can be very challenging is getting yourself
out of a familiar perspective and looking at an event or an
experience in a fundamentally different way. This is
Mezirow’s idea of perspective taking. Today, as you
critically reflect, you will be prompted to think about your
students in ways that you may not have thought about them
before. You are going to think about how your teaching
practices may positively or negatively be impacting your
students. We have explored how assumptions inform our
actions. Now, we are going to challenge ourselves to look at
our work through a different lens in order to shift our
perspective about our teaching practice.

61

I introduced each concept, using definitions of the concepts used in Brookfield’s book (2017),
Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. I then went on to facilitate a learning activity that
helped teachers better understand the concept. Spending the first three sessions focusing on
teaching critical reflection concepts helped teachers to better understand how to critically reflect
(evidence noted below). To provide even more assistance in their learning, I also modeled and
provided feedback, as they began to write their own critical reflections.
Modeling. After direct instruction, I modeled the new learned strategy by sharing my
own critical reflection. Modeling provides clear examples of what a skill looks like. It was
crucial that I modeled the concepts that I directly taught to support teachers’ learning of that
concept. Brookfield (2021) suggests that one must model anything that is expected for learners to
do. According to Vygotsky’s (1978) notion of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD),
assisted performance defines what a learner can do with help (Tharp & Gilmore, 1998). ZPD
can be divided into four stages (Vygotsky, 1978). During the first three sessions of the coaching
program, I focused on stage one of ZPD by scaffolding support through modeling critical
reflection concepts discussed in the previous section before directing teachers to critically reflect
on their own. For example, during session one, I taught teachers how to distinguish between a
descriptive, comparative, and critical reflection, and then modeled what a critical reflection looks
like by sharing an excerpt from one of my own critical reflections I wrote as I was creating the
coaching program. I shared:
When I was subbing for a seventh-grade class, I was asked why I care so much about
LGBTQ+ issues. This student was calling classmates gay in a derogatory way. I directed
him to come sit next to me, while the other students were doing their work. I quietly had
a conversation about the impacts of calling someone gay. We had a ten-minute
62

conversation about the incident. At the end of the conversation he asked, “Ms. Traylor,
why do you care so much, are you gay?” I impulsively said no without much
thought. This ended our conversation, and it was time for the kids to go out to
recess. During recess, I couldn’t stop thinking about how quickly I said no. Why did I say
no? What assumption influenced that decision? Was I afraid of losing the student’s
“respect” as their teacher? It was in this moment that I realized that I usually would tell
myself that I wasn’t “out” professionally because I didn’t want TGLBQ+ issues and
inclusivity to only be perceived to be important to queer people. However, there was
more to it. I have deeply internalized a lot of shame around my own identity, and really
didn’t want students to know in fear of losing power over them. I hadn’t really processed
the implications of heteronormativity on my own life, personally and professionally; and
realized, in that moment with the student, I was being complicit in heteronormativity by
not allowing the student to see me as a queer teacher. As I prepare to lead this coaching
group, it will be liberating for me to embrace and express myself as a coach who is
queer. I will have to be mindful of how my internalized shame and assumptions have
shaped my own positionality and experiences to understand my coaching actions
throughout this dissertation study.
After reading the excerpt aloud, I then displayed the reflection and had the teachers in the
program read it to themselves while they thought about the critical components to my reflection.
I facilitated the following discussion:
C: Looking at the critical reflection, you can see that my reflection went beyond being
descriptive or comparative by exploring power dynamics and hegemonic
63

assumptions. What aspects of this reflection do you think make it critical? Where do you
see me discussing power or hegemony?
Michael: When you ask yourself the question, “was I afraid of losing the student’s ‘respect’ as
their teacher,” that made me think of your perceived power dynamics between you and
your student. Later, in the reflection, you go on to state how you realized that you were
afraid of losing power over them.
C: Yes, that sentence represents the power dynamic that was unearthed as I began to think
critically about why I impulsively lied to the student, telling him I was not gay.
C: What other parts of this reflection make it critical? Does anyone else have any
thoughts? Feel free to share aloud or in the chat.
Tricia: The sentence, “it was in this moment that I realized that I usually would tell myself that I
wasn’t out professionally because I didn’t want TGLBQ+ issues and inclusivity to only
be perceived to be important to queer people,” highlights how an assumption can help us
not think deeper about the meaning behind our actions. You were able to disrupt that
assumption by diving deeper through questions that were able to help you think about
alternative reasons to why you lied about your sexuality.
C: Yes. I interrogated my assumptions in a way that was able to lead to a deeper
understanding and change in perspective.
C: Alright. Between this session and our next one, in two weeks, you will write your first
critical reflection as part of the coaching program. I will post your critical reflection
prompt in Google Classroom. I’ve also posted my critical reflection example and an
article describing the reflection typology to help guide you as you write your first
64

reflection. We will continue to explore aspects of critical reflection and I will teach and
model different CR concepts to help develop your practice.
While in the future, I would refrain from telling teachers this is an example of critical reflection
and simply ask them what they see, the exchange demonstrates how I modeled what a critical
reflection is. The two teachers who answered were able to identify power dynamics and
hegemonic assumptions, noting how the information makes the reflection critical. Through
questioning and modeling, two means of assisted performance (Tharpe and Gallimore, 1989),
and hearing participant input, all participants were provided support in understanding the critical
reflection concepts I directly taught. This provided participants guided support with writing their
own critical reflection once the session was over.
Creating Space for Group Feedback. To support participant critical
reflection development, I offered space for critical reflection feedback during the first half of the
program. My intention was to create space for feedback to help participants move from more
superficial to deeper levels of critical reflection using Jay and Johnson’s (2002)
typology. Research asserts that multilevel models, like Jay and Johnson’s (2002) typology, are
practical when providing feedback on reflection depth because characteristics of individual
reflection levels can be used as assessment criteria (Saric & Steh, 2017). For example, during the
second coaching session, teachers were directed to spend 20 minutes writing a critical reflection,
answering the following reflection prompt: How is your reality similar and different from the
realities of your students? Explore deeply the ideas of identity, positionality, and assumptions,
etc. in relation to race, gender, and sexuality. After teachers finished writing their critical
reflections, I explained that we were going to practice giving each other feedback using Jay and
Johnson’s (2002) three typology descriptions. I then asked one person to share their critical
65

reflection who was interested in getting feedback from me. As Holly read her reflection, I
listened while writing feedback notes in my notebook. When she finished, I gave her feedback
on a section of her reflection. I said,
Based on the section where you talked about gender and sexuality, and the difference and
similarities between the experiences of you and your students you mentioned that you
come from a family where the expectation was for you to marry a man and have
kids. You weren’t given the space to explore alternative aspects of your sexuality. You
also mentioned that your students seemed to be more exposed to an expansive
understanding of gender and sexuality than you were. Using the description of what
makes a reflection critical, you can interrogate your thoughts further by exploring the
implications of your perceived differences. What assumptions influence your teaching
practices based on your family upbringing and the internalized conditioning you
experienced regarding sexuality? I’m curious how unprocessed assumptions make you
complicit in cis-heteronormativity and how it impacts your classroom. A strategy that I
use when writing critical reflections is I first write the reflection. Then I reread what I
wrote, asking myself critical questions, regarding implications, assumptions, power, and
hegemony, to then expand on my writing. Based on the feedback provided you can go
back and expand on your reflection, exploring what comes up when you look deeper into
underlying implications and assumptions.
In the excerpt, the feedback I gave suggested to the teacher that it would be a good idea to
interrogate, further, her thoughts “by exploring the implication of perceived differences”
between the teacher and her students. Then I suggested a strategy she can use to help her further
interrogate. After I modeled the provision of specific feedback, I divided teachers into
66

partnerships, put them in Zoom breakout rooms, and directed each teacher to share their critical
reflections with their partner, inviting them to use the typical questions on the typology
worksheet (Jay & Johnson, 2002). Modeling how to give each other feedback was an
accountability strategy I decided to use to help them create a more sustainable practice. If I could
help them create a space for feedback that was constructive and pushed them to deepen their
reflection, then as they continued to develop their critical reflection practice, teachers could rely
on each other as feedback partners.
Critical Reflection Participant Growth. I spent the first part of the program (sessions 1-
3) teaching critical reflection techniques, modeling critical reflection concepts, and modeling
how to provide feedback to support a teacher’s ability to critically reflect on their own. During
the second part of the program, teachers were still provided the opportunity to critically reflect,
however, the focus was more on the discourse that was happening within the sessions. From the
beginning until the end of the program, I noticed a development in teacher critical reflections.
Five out of eight participants demonstrated a significant growth in their critical reflections. For
example, Joy, when they started, struggled with moving from a comparative to a more critical
reflection. Here is an example of a critical reflection they wrote during session 2 and a reflection
they wrote during session 5.
Excerpt from session 2 reflection: I’ve been thinking a lot about the difference and
sameness between me and my students during this pandemic—more obvious differences
that I’m aware of (my whiteness, class, citizenship, both parents went to college) plus the
more nuanced ways we’re all experiencing differences in these times—awareness of
privacy, space, access to a car to go for a drive, independence of being an adult (with
67

class and racial privilege). This is what comes up when I think about the similarities and
differences between me and my students.
Excerpt from session 5 reflection: Most of my closest friends are also queer and
nonbinary/trans, and it feels very special to have access to those spaces and my extended
queer family. School feels like a different space where I must tuck away parts of myself
when I’m around adults—I think that transphobia and homophobia are kind of just in the
air, they’re so entrenched in the system of schooling. When uncomfortable moments
come up, I try to remind myself of the systems that produce and perpetuate histories of
heteronormativity and cis-normativity rather than hold resentment towards individual
people. As for the ways in which I perpetuate heteronormativity and cis-
normativity…professionally, I sometimes perpetuate some aspects just by being silent
around gender stuff. I think that it usually comes from being uncomfortable with the
vulnerability of talking about my own identities with folks I might not fully trust? I’m not
sure. There have been times at school where I’ve been positioned as sort of a “queer
ambassador” where I get asked about identities that I don’t hold, and I try to be direct and
honest about only being one queer person with my own specific experiences... I don’t
know! I feel overwhelmed by all the work that needs to be done. But I also really enjoy
this work and am excited to keep growing into it!
It is evident in the first excerpt that Joy’s reflection focuses on a comparative analysis of them
and their students. They note the “more obvious differences” as well as the “more nuanced ways
we’re all experiencing differences in these times” but there isn’t an interrogation of these
differences. In the second excerpt, they use their reflection to process a deeper meaning of their
experience as a Queer educator, interrogating their own positionality, internalization, while also
68

acknowledging the oppressive structure that perpetuates people’s experience of cis-
heteronormativity. When they say, “when uncomfortable moments come up, I try to remind
myself of the systems that produce and perpetuate histories of heteronormativity and cis-
normativity rather than hold resentment towards individual people,” Joy is demonstrating an
understanding of the difference between individual and systemic forms of oppression and
implications of living in systems with a history of such oppression. Additionally, they make
mention of how silence is a way that they perpetuate transphobia and homophobia. Joy’s
reflection is an example of a critical type because of their ability to consider the systemic
implications of cis-heteronormativity and its impact on their practice and the behavior of their
parents to establish a new perspective (Jay & Johnson, 2002).
Growth Through Learner’s Eyes. It is important for me to not only analyze how I teach
teachers to critically reflect as their coach, but also center their learning through focusing on their
perception of the strategies I am teaching. Brookfield (2017) discusses the importance of
“constantly researching student responses to learning and making continuous adjustments based
on what you find out” (p. 99). While I recognize the inherent power dynamics that might prevent
teachers in the coaching program to be honest with me, their coach, about my practice, I decided
that hearing their perspectives would be better than not attempting to at all. During the end of
program interviews, six out of eight teachers noted how critical reflection helped them to
understand their fear and how it affects their teaching. One teacher said, “critically reflecting on
fear and its barriers really made me look deep into why it was there and how it impacts my
teaching.” Using critical reflection as a tool to look at “why it was there” helped the teacher to
understand the deeper meaning of fear in relation to the political implications of systemic silence
induced by cis-heteronormativity and other forms of oppression.
69

Another teacher said, “one takeaway I had from the coaching program was learning how
to critically reflect on my teaching practice. I learned that fear was a major barrier to me
disrupting cis-heteronormativity.” She went on to discuss how she can’t create an inclusive and
safe space for her students if she is not analyzing different types of assumptions and perspectives
to address her fear. These statements show that these two teachers perceived critical reflection,
the act of reflecting on assumptions, perspectives, and implications in order to make new
meaning (Brookfield, 2017), to be a helpful tool to process fear in order to move from paralysis
towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity.
Taylor (2000) cites Herber’s (1998) study that showed how provoked negative feelings
can become a catalyst for questioning the learners’ assumptions and encourage self-
reflection. Therefore, the significance of processing feelings increases the power of critical
reflection as important when cultivating transformative learning (Taylor, 2000). As coaches, we
can use critical reflection as a tool to help our learners understand and address fear and other
emotions that create paralysis. When critical reflection is taught with intention—through direct
instruction, modeling, and the provision of feedback—learners can gain deeper insight into how
their positionalities and emotions affect their practice. Only then can teachers move towards
disrupting cis-heteronormativity and creating safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+
students in their classroom.
Addressing Fear Through Rational Discourse
As noted in the conceptual framework, rational discourse was used as a tool to help
teachers interrogate their positionality, teaching practices, and, based on initial findings, fear. To
coach teachers to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and work towards creating safe and affirming
conditions in their classroom, rational discourse was used as an integral coaching tool during
70

each session. According to Mezirow (1995), there are three interrelated components that are
important to fostering transformative learning- the centrality of experience, critical reflection,
and rational discourse. Unlike everyday discourse, rational discourse is used “when we have
reason to question the comprehensibility, truth, appropriateness, (in relation to norms), or
authenticity (in relation to feelings) of what is being asserted or to question the credibility of the
person making the statement” (Mezirow, 1991, p.77). It is through this type of discourse that a
learner’s experience and critical reflection come together, leading to transformative action
(Taylor, 2000). To prepare teachers to participate in rational discourse, I followed Taylor’s
(2000) suggestion to cultivate the following conditions: establish a sense of bravery, openness,
and trust; and provide accurate information to help participants develop an emerging
understanding of cis-heteronormativity. In this section, I discuss how I focused on the intention
of creating conditions that promote rational discourse and explore teacher growth in this area.
Establishing A Sense of Bravery, Openness, and Trust. For teachers to participate in
rational discourse, I needed to be intentional in cultivating conditions that lend themself to this
type of discourse. As transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 1991) suggests, establishing a
sense of openness and trust is key to discourse. Along with that, Arao & Clemens (2013) discuss
the importance of creating a brave space for collaboration and discourse. Therefore, through
establishing routines, guidelines, and expectations I attempted to create a brave space in which
teachers could be open and build trust to cultivate the conditions needed for rational discourse.
After initial interviews and hearing the diversity in participant identities and experiences
with cis-heteronormativity, I knew that it would be crucial for me to follow Arao and Clemens’
(2013) assertion that facilitators should focus on creating a brave space, not a safe one. To
normalize difficult conversations around cis-heteronormativity and fear, I needed to create a
71

space that “emphasized the need for courage rather than the illusion of safety” (Arao & Clemens,
2013, p.141). Authentic learning about cis-heteronormativity and what it takes to disrupt this
oppressive structure, requires risk, difficulty, and controversy, which are not compatible with
safety (Arao & Clemens, 2013).
Through establishing and reminding teachers of group guidelines and expectations, I set
the tone early on to create a brave space. During session one, the group and I created community
guidelines that set us up to build a community that inspires bravery and authentic communication
during coaching sessions. I introduced community guidelines by saying the following,
It is important that we create a space, together, that encourages us to make courageous
choices within the coaching sessions. If we are to work towards disrupting cis-
heteronormativity within our teaching practices, making brave choices will be
necessary. My goal is to help cultivate a space where you all feel comfortable to practice
making brave choices through your reflections and through challenging conversations. So
how do we do that? I believe that the first step is for us, together, to craft guidelines that
will guide our time together. I will first suggest and review a few guidelines I think will
help us establish a brave space, and then will take suggestions from you all.
The assumptions and guidelines I suggested were:
1. We can’t promise safety in this space, but we can create a space that promotes
courageous discourse
2. We center consent-based practices, participating in ways that feel comfortable and are
accessible to our abilities and needs
3. We address behaviors, ideas, and choices knowing that we are capable of change and
growth
72

4. There is a wealth of information and experience in this group AND everyone has
immanent value
5. We honor and validate feelings and somatic experiences as they arise during the group
sessions.
After we discussed the guidelines suggested above, I asked for participants to discuss their
thoughts on the suggested guidelines, and then asked if anyone had any others to add. Every
teacher agreed on the five guidelines that I suggested, and no one had any other guideline to add
at that time. To make sure that participants understood that they had the opportunity to add
guidelines at any point of the coaching program, I decided, during session two, to have an
explicit discussion about bravery and safety and what they think makes up a brave space. I
wanted to talk deliberately about why I’ve decided to focus on creating a brave space and not a
safe one. That discussion went as follows:
C: We are going to talk about the difference between creating a safe space versus a brave
space. We often hear people use the term “safe space”. What is a safe space? What does
a safe space make you think of?
Joy: When I think about a safe space, I think of creating conditions for participants, students,
community members, etc. to feel included, and significant.
Tricia: Safe space to me is a space where people feel safe, comfortable, and feel like they can
be themselves.
C: Yes, that is what I have thought of too. Recently, I read this article about creating a Brave
Space. I will upload the article to Google Classroom for you all to read if you’d like. The
article states how safety can’t be guaranteed, particularly with a group of people whose
identities are marginalized and oppressed by dominant culture. So, if safety can’t be
73

guaranteed, what can we strive for? We need to cultivate a space, together, that inspires
courage and brave choice in the face of conflict and difficult situations. That is what I’m
hoping we can focus on together, being courageous as we confront cis-heteronormativity
and process internal and external barriers that get in the way of us disrupting cis-
heteronormativity.
C: We are now going to go into small groups for 10 minutes and discuss how we can
cultivate a brave space with this group. Thinking about what I said about safety, what can
a brave coaching space look like for our group?
After a 10-minute small group discussion, both groups each added one guideline to add to our
group guidelines: 1) We will do our best to speak our mind, and 2) We understand that we all
have been conditioned by dominant, societal narratives that influence our thinking; therefore, we
will focus on learning and growing from our reflections and conversations with each
other. Spending another session discussing bravery, provided participants another opportunity to
think about the group assumptions and guidelines which helped them contribute to the list. At the
beginning of each coaching session, I read the group assumptions and guidelines to help set the
tone and remind participants of our focus on bravery and courage.
During session four, I knew that I was on my way to creating a brave space. This session
focused on teachers exploring how they felt about teaching gender and sexuality to their
students. During their critical reflection, they were asked to explore any fear or emotional
barriers that come up for them. After critically reflecting, teachers participated in rational
discourse, sharing their thoughts with each other to gain even a better understanding of how their
fear or emotional barriers connect to their teaching practices. The discourse focused on teacher
positionality, and the impact identity and experiences have on one’s comfort with teaching
74

gender and sexuality to their students. The following discourse taken from the session four
transcripts show a tension between a Queer and non-Queer teacher and how they were able to be
in dialogue with each other for the purpose of transformation.
John: I do not feel comfortable teaching gender and sexuality to my third graders. I am
afraid that I don’t know enough to do a good job. I am also terrified of parent
pushback. I come from a traditional catholic family. A lot of my students and their
families are very religious (catholic). If they are being raised in a similar way to
how I was, then I know that they are being taught to be homophobia and
transphobic. I don’t know what to do or say, so I haven't done any gender or
sexuality work with my students.
Holly: John, I hear what you are saying, and I also want to make a point about identity.
You are a straight, cis man. You don’t have to think about your gender or sexuality
every day. It seems easier for people who were raised with homophobic and
transphobic religious beliefs, and happen to be straight and cis, don’t really have to
grapple with how their religious beliefs impact others on a day-to-day basis. I
don’t want you to feel like I am coming for you, but as a bisexual person who is
grappling with gender, I know how important it would have been for me to have
the space, even in third grade, to learn about how expansive gender and sexuality
is.
John: Yeah, Holly, I think you bring up some great points that I haven’t thought about.
And I do recognize that I haven’t thought about it because of my privilege of being
straight and cis. I know that this work looks different for my Queer/Trans
colleagues.
75

This is one example of how I knew that we had created a brave space for rational discourse.
Holly was able to speak to John in a brave way, sharing her thoughts through her lens as a Queer
educator. John was able to hear Holly’s words and in return acknowledge how his privilege
affects the actions he was and was not willing to take in his classroom. The conversation, started
by John and Holly, provoked a longer discourse around positionality and how identity and
experiences play a role in our teaching practices. Teachers really explored the connection
between positionality and fear, interrogating their comfort levels around teaching gender and
sexuality in their classroom.
Providing Access to Accurate Information. To foster rational discourse, I needed to
also provide teachers with accurate information on topics important to their transformative
process (Mezirow, 1991). Mezirow (1991) also suggests providing complete information,
however, due to the 3-month timeframe, complete information was not provided or the goal of
this study. Providing access to accurate information supports a learner to “be free from coercion
and distorting self-conception and be able to weigh evidence and assess arguments objectively”
(Mezirow, 1991, p.78). I knew it would be crucial to provide information about cis-
heteronormativity and its implications on schooling, for teachers to be able to participate in
rational discourse. Therefore, I provided opportunities for teachers to learn about cis-
heteronormativity and its pervasiveness in schools, through specific lessons, hoping to create an
accurate and emerging understanding. As Brookfield (2017) reminds us, critical theory seeks to
understand how people come to accept unjust systems as normal and natural. With a deeper
understanding of cis-heteronormativity, my assumption was that teachers would be able to
interrogate their own internalization and fear, creating space for honest reflection on how they
are complicit to cis-heteronormativity. Teachers were not able to develop a complete
76

understanding of cis-heteronormativity because they could not examine the complexities of it
due to the limitations of Covid-19 and virtual learning. Table 4 shares some lessons and activities
I used to provide teachers with information to learn more about cis-heteronormativity and how to
disrupt it in their classroom (more detail provided in the instructional guide- See Appendix E).

77

Table 4
Activity Objectives to Teach Cis-Heteronormativity
Session Activity Objective
Session 1 Explore identities and experiences through the I Am From activity
Session 2 Define cis-heteronormativity and brainstorm how cis-heteronormativity shows up in our personal
and professional lives
Session 3 Explore cis-heteronormativity in school through reading and discussing two op-ed pieces about
heteronormativity in schools.
Session 4 Explore how they could disrupt cis-heteronormativity, what supports they would need, and what
accountability structure would support their growth and sustainability.
Session 5 Create mission and vision statements that work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity in their
class

These activities listed in the chart were meant to help teachers to develop an understanding of
cis-heteronormativity needed to be able to explore their positionality, fear, and teaching practices
through rational discourse. Learning about cis-heteronormativity and its impact on social
conditioning helped three teachers, in particular, understand their fear as a consequence of being
conditioned to be silent with dominant structures of oppression. For example, the following
discourse, during session six, highlights a conversation where three teachers explored the
connection between cis-heteronormativity and their fear.
Christie: Cis-heteronormativity has shown up in my life in ways that I wasn’t even aware
of. I never was able to connect a lot of my own insecurities and fear to the
conditioning of heteronormativity until learning about it and its pervasiveness in
our life and in our schools.
78

Joy: Yeah, it took me a long time to come to terms with my own sexual orientation and
gender identity because of cis-heteronormativity. The power and control this
structure of oppression has over everyone is mind boggling to think about. I
understand now how important disruption of these types of systems are, if any
change is going to happen. I don’t want my students to grow up in a cis-
heteronormative school environment like I did. It’s damaging.
Coach: How can you connect what you know and understand about cis-
heteronormativity to the fear you experience? Christie touched upon it, but I was
hoping you all could expand.
John: Being cis and straight, I realized how my fear of disruption was grounded in my
privilege. I have not only been conditioned to participate in heteronormativity, I
perpetuate it. If I’m not disrupting the structure, I am saying it’s okay with me.
I’ve realized my fear is based on going against dominant structure of cis-
heteronormativity.
Holly: For me my fear is based on safety. I fear that if I disrupt, as a Queer person, that I
will be harmed more than a cis-straight colleague who is disrupting. I fear being
fired, harmed, violated- it’s really scary. I know how rampant homophobia and
transphobia is and how cis-heteronormativity perpetuates this hate. It scares me,
but at the same time, I am trying to create a safer environment for my students.
This discourse shows how these three teachers were able to reflect critically on cis-
heteronormativity and connect it to the fear they experience. Christie started the discussion by
saying, “I never was able to connect a lot of my own insecurities and fear to the conditioning of
heteronormativity until learning about it and its pervasiveness in our life and in our schools”.
79

She has learned information, through the coaching program, that has helped her understand her
insecurities and fear as a product of cis-heteronormativity. The dialogue continued, showcasing
an understanding of how cis-heteronormativity fosters fear due to “going against dominant
structures of oppression” as John stated. Also, Holly discussed her fear of being harmed, because
she understands that cis-heteronormativity “perpetuates hate.” These teacher statements are
evidence that they had an emerging understanding of cis-heteronormativity and its pervasiveness.
If teachers were able to also interrogate their default day-to-day practices instead of just
receiving lessons on cis-heteronormativity, they would have been able to develop a more
complete understanding of cis-heteronormativity.
Disorienting Dilemma. As discussed in my conceptual framework, my goal was to try
and trigger a disorienting dilemma for participants in order to support the transformation of their
teaching practice. Quinnan (1997) asserts that when adult learners are seriously challenged to
assess their world value system and worldview, they are subsequently changed by the
experience. During coaching session two, I facilitated a group activity that was meant to trigger a
disorienting dilemma (Mezirow, 1991). A disorienting dilemma, or trigger, provokes criticality
in reflection and discourse, allowing learners to experience learning more directly and
holistically, beyond a logical and rational approach (Taylor, 2000). During this activity, teachers
were directed to watch two video clips from YouTube. The first video clip was titled, “Parents
outraged after Kindergarten Teacher Discusses Gender Identity,” produced by CBS News, and
the second video was titled, “Schools are Teaching Gender and Sexual Identity”, produced by the
Heritage Foundation. Both video clips highlight a conservative opinion on teaching LGBTQ+
education in elementary schools. Because all participants identified as liberal or radical within
their political and social viewpoints (information provided during initial interviews), my
80

assumption was that the two video clips would trigger a disorienting dilemma for the participants
because of the stark difference in opinion about LGBTQ+ education that was presented in the
video clips. Kagan (1982, 1994), as described by Hess (2019), also calls this a contradiction- “a
moment of dissonance when a stock story is contradicted by a disorienting reality (p. 256).
Participants were directed to explore their response and feelings toward the video clips through a
group reflection activity. After watching the two video clips, teachers were assigned to one of
two breakout groups. In groups, teachers discussed the videos using Rolfe et al.'s (2001)
reflective model, What? So What? Now What?. Table 5 shows the questions teachers answered
and an example of some of their small group responses.

Table 5
Video Activity and Questions and Discussion Quotes
Reflection Questions Quotes from Participant Discussion
What? What did you observe in the
videos? What issue is being
addressed? What population is being
served?
“The first video was a report done by CBS sharing the backlash a
kindergarten teacher faced for reading a gender expansive read aloud
book to her kindergarten class. The second video was more of an
explicit propaganda video stating how ‘inappropriate it is’ to teach
LGBTQ+ education in schools. These videos both highlight
conservative and traditional views on LGBTQ+ education.”
So What? What critical questions do
these videos cause you to ask? What
about the videos stuck out/made an
impact on you? What broader issues
arise in this video?
“Questions that come up in our small group: what can we do to help
parents unlearn cis-heteronormativity? Who decides what’s the teacher's
job vs what is not the teacher’s job? How do our parents at HCNS view
our role in what students learn? Who is being served with these views on
LGBTQ+ education? Whose job is it to support the teacher who is being
criticized and attacked by the parents? There are so many contextual
factors that come into play with teaching LGBTQ+ education. A lot to
think about.”
Now What? If you were to make a
response video, what would you
say? What would you want people to
know about the information brought
up in the videos you watched?
“If we were making a response video, we would focus on discussing
California law that protects teachers who teach LGBTQ+ education, the
amount of literature that supports LGBTQ+ education being taught in
school and talk about consequences of not doing this work (bully, mental
health, suicide, etc.). We also feel that all school staff need to be on the
same page and work as a team when pushback occurs.”

81

After 20 minutes in small groups, participants returned to a whole group debrief. During the
debrief, I asked teachers to think about their personal fear in relation to the conservative video
clips they watched.
C: We will spend time during this program exploring fear and its role it plays in doing
LGBTQ+ work in our classroom. When watching these video clips, what emotions come
to mind? How does fear show up, if at all? Take a minute to think of an answer. Then I
invite you to write your response in the chat. We will then discuss with each other.
C: Thanks for participating in the chat. Does anyone want to share and expand on what they
wrote?
Tricia: I would. The two videos reminded me how many people think differently about
LGBTQ+ issues than I do. So many people. It is scary and quite overwhelming to think
about. It’s nice to be in a group with like-minded people who are looking to be disruptive
in our classrooms. However, when I think about our families, the larger community, and
the rest of the nation, so many people are very conservative and “traditional” in their
thinking. It scares me to think about the pushback I may face. However, the videos also
ignite a sense of urgency. Like we NEED to do this work.
Joy: Yeah, I agree. I live in such a queer bubble. I’ve created a family and community of
queer people and feel very safe in my identities when I’m with my chosen family. These
videos reminded me of how hateful folks can be. It’s really overwhelming to think
about. When thinking about fear, I think about the safety of me, and queer people like
me. Like will I be putting myself at risk when speaking out about issues that matter to
me and my community?
82

C: Yeah. I agree. Watching videos with a conservative lens can provoke fear in people who
disagree with their message and beliefs. It's challenging to recognize that many people in
this country do believe that LGBTQ+ education should not be taught in schools. This
can be overwhelming to think about, and it’s all necessary to understand the urgency to
work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity as teachers.
This activity was meant to trigger a disorienting dilemma; however, after learning more about
what a disorienting dilemma looks like in practice, I realized this was not a disorienting
dilemma, but an activity meant to create a sense of urgency. Teachers already had an
understanding that there are communities of people that are conservative and perpetuate cis-
heteronormativity (informed by data regarding teacher fear of parent pushback and as evidenced
in Tricia saying it “reminded” her). Therefore, this activity didn’t help them challenge an
existing stock story (Bell et al., 2009; Hess, 2019), but created a sense of urgency to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity, because it was a reminder of the number of people with conservative views of
LGBTQ+ inclusivity, those outside “a queer bubble.” Hess (2019) discusses the dynamics of
transformation, coined by Kegan (1982, 1994). Kagan suggests that “transformative learning-
particularly those factors that shape people’s identity personally and in community- moves
through an ongoing cycle of confirmation, contradiction, and continuity” (p. 256).
Confirmation— understanding the space in which learning begins— is the first step in the cycle
(Kegan, 1982, 1994; Hess, 2019). Looking at this activity now, the activity supports a
confirmation for teachers, helping them to understand the stock stories— dominant narrative—
and learning space of a group of people whose conservative views differ from the group of
teachers participating in the study. This activity did not challenge a teacher’s stock story (Hess,
2019) but seemed to help teachers understand the need and urgency to challenge conservative
83

stock stories through disrupting cis-heteronormativity in their classroom. As noted, Tricia
grappled with her fear and the urgency for her to disrupt when she said, “it scares me to think
about the pushback I may face. However, the videos also ignite a sense of urgency. Like we
NEED to do this work.” While Tricia spoke about the urgency, Joy focused on the fear and
overwhelm that comes with understanding how many people think and act differently than they
do when it comes to LGBTQ+ issues. The small group activity and whole group debrief, during
session two, prompted an important conversation between participants connecting fear to the
urgency to work towards disruption. Even though this activity did not prompt a disorienting
dilemma, it did spark a sense of urgency, as noted by Tricia.
Learner’s Participation in Rational Discourse. As noted above, I facilitated
conversations, activities, and lessons that helped develop specific conditions needed for teachers
to participate in rational discourse. In this section, I share participant growth with their rational
discourse skills and note how participants used rational discourse to explore their fear in order to
work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity.
Participant Transformation. Transformation is promoted and developed through rational
discourse (Brown, 2004). Mezirow (1996) asserts that when learners can “weigh evidence and
assess arguments objectively, are open to alternate perspectives, and are able to reflect critically
on presuppositions and their consequences, and are able to accept informed, objective, and
rational consensus as a legitimate test of validity” through rational discourse, transformation
happens (p. 78). Participants were all in agreement with understanding the need and urgency of
disrupting cis-heteronormativity in their classrooms. However, they differed in level of and
reason behind their fear, their positionality based on identity and experience, and their teaching
practices and classroom assumptions around teaching LGBTQ+ education. Because of these
84

differences, rational discourse became an efficient tool to help teachers learn to participate in
critical discussion with the intention of transformation and growth— being able to move from
fear to action.
The level of discourse around fear shifted from the first half of the program to the second.
After spending time creating the conditions for rational discourse, I noticed a shift in
participants’ ability to engage in rational discourse. During the first half of the program, teacher
discourse often sounded very surface level. Teachers were very agreeable, expanding a little off
each other. Here is an example of teacher discourse taken from session three.
C: Today we are going to talk about fear, and what barriers it presents, if any. How does
fear impact your work, teaching practices, etc.? What is your relationship with fear,
personally and professionally?
John: I feel like my fear affects my planning. I feel torn between what I need to plan
based on the required curriculum and standards and what I want and feel like I need
to plan regarding LGBTQ+ education and other justice topics. I feel like the fear is in
choosing one side or the other, and this affects me a lot.
Holly: I didn’t think about this before, but whenever I am teaching a gender or sexuality
lesson that I am passionate about I am hyper cognizant of the fear in my body. I’m
very focused on what I am saying and every move I make while teaching. In my head
I tell myself teaching LGBTQ+ education isn’t a big deal, but when I think about how
fear impacts my body as I teach these lessons, I know it’s a big deal for me.
Lucas: I have a similar experience. Last year when I was working with seventh graders, I
noticed that I behave differently when teaching lessons that cover gender and
sexuality topics than I do with more traditional lessons like math and reading. When I
85

teach more traditional lessons, I walk around the classroom, I ask more questions, and
engage with my students. When teaching lessons around gender and sexuality, I sit on
a high stool in front of my class, teach the lesson, and don’t engage with the students
as much. I never identified that as fear, so thank you Holly.
C: Yeah. Really acknowledging and understanding our fear and how it shows up in our
body and behavior is very important. It shows up in ways that we may not recognize,
unless we take the opportunity to critically reflect and talk about what is going on.
This discourse shows how participants were able to explore fear through expanding on each
other’s statement. For example, Lucas mentioned how he had a similar experience to Holly and
thanked her for helping him identify something he wasn’t aware of. This type of discourse
happened often throughout the first cycle of the program. Participants were very supportive of
each other, learning from each other in a very non-critical, and safe way.
During the second cycle of the program, I began to see a shift in discourse, where
participants began to “weigh evidence and assess arguments objectively and be critically
reflective on presuppositions and their consequences'' (Mezirow, 1996, p.78). For example,
during session five, teachers critically reflected on the following prompt: How would you create
and/or how do you create safe and affirming conditions for your students? Reflect on your own
identity, positionality, and disposition, along with any fear that may arise in relation to creating
safe and affirming conditions for students. After writing their critical reflections, they
participated in discourse, sharing their reflections with each other. The following conversation
between four teachers was sparked during a specific discussion around the developmental
appropriateness of LGBTQ+ education.
86

Joy: Teaching first grade, I grapple with how to create safe and affirming conditions
through my lessons and instructions. I hear all the time, in the media, and through
other sources, that first graders aren’t “old enough” to learn about gender and
sexuality or it isn’t developmentally appropriate. And I disagree. I believe that
children, at a young age, are exploring gender, and have an innate understanding of
its expansiveness. What I struggle with is parent response. How do I work with
parents to help them understand that this is appropriate, important, and necessary?
John: I understand what you are saying, Joy. However, I have a hard time understanding
what is developmentally appropriate to teach. Like I think a lot about that with my
third graders. What can they understand? Is it too much to begin talking about
gender and sexuality?
Holly: This to me is where dominant cultural conditioning comes into play. We are
taught that topics of gender expansiveness and sexuality are too perverse or
untraditional to teach to children- that these topics are saved for adult discussions.
This is a way to silence and condition us to not talk to children about these topics.
However, being Queer, I know that I was exploring gender roles and my sexuality
at a very young age. It’s so important to teach, and important to acknowledge and
think critically about why so many people in society think these topics are
inappropriate.
Tricia: Yeah, John I understand where you are coming from. I was raised in a
conservative, religious, Palestinian family. Heteronormativity is what was taught.
It was important for me to marry a man and have a family. That is what I was taught
was my purpose. It wasn’t until I was older, in my twenties, when I started
87

questioning my upbringing and began exploring alternative perspectives, like we’ve
talked about. I’ve learned that as a teacher, it is my responsibility to teach my
students accurate information and histories and teach them to think critically about
the information they receive from different sources in their life. Even if I am
scared, and think I don’t know that much, I need to do this work.
Joy: Yea, that is what I’ve been thinking a lot about too. How can I teach my first
graders to think critically about the information they are receiving? I’ve decided
that I can use picture books, toys, and other forms of children’s media to have them
begin to think about gender and gender norms. This has been a good starting point,
and students are receptive.
As they continued to talk, other teachers chimed in, and by the end of the discussions, teachers
had come to the consensus that it was important for all ages at HCNS, kindergarten through
eighth grade, to learn about gender and sexuality in order to create safe and affirming conditions
for their students. This display of rational discourse shows how these teachers were able to
challenge beliefs— Holly’s response to John, and critically reflect on consequences of
presuppositions— Tricia’s reflection on her traditional upbringing and the consequences of what
she was taught. Holly dispelled a stock story, children are too young to learn about gender and
sexuality, by sharing her own counterstory saying, “However, being Queer, I know that I was
exploring gender roles and my sexuality at a very young age.” In Gumbs’ (2015) short piece,
Octavia’s Brood: Science Fiction Stories from Social Justice Movements, she says, “Am I
depending on evidence to confirm what my soul has evidence enough for?” (p. 38). When
weighing evidence, (Mezirow, 1991) it is important to note counterstories as sufficient evidence,
as showcased in the dialogue between John and Holly. This level of discourse was not displayed
88

in the example from part one of the program. These teachers learned to participate in rational
discourse and use this as a tool to not only interrogate their fear, but also their teaching practice
in transformative ways.
Finding 2: Coaches Must Differentiate to Address Varying Levels of Knowledge
Through analysis of initial interviews and participant critical reflections during the first
three sessions, I realized that a teacher’s understanding of cis-heteronormativity and LGBTQ+
education informed their capacity to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming
conditions in the classroom. Even though teachers were interested and wanted to learn how to
disrupt cis-heteronormativity, if they weren’t provided with individual, differentiated support and
resources to teach them about cis-heteronormativity and LGBTQ+ education, it would be
difficult to support them towards creating a project meant to create safe and affirming conditions
for the students in the classroom.
Informed by the Four Ways of Knowing Typology (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano,
2017), I was able to differentiate based on each participant’s developmental stage. During the
initial interview session, I used a questionnaire to also ask participants questions that helped me
understand which phase in development each participant fell under. The questions were informed
by Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano’s (2017) framework (See Appendix B). Based on the
information provided by the questionnaire, I identified four participants to be socializing and
four to be instrumental. The four who fell under the socializing way of knowing also identified
as LGBTQ+. The four instrumental learners identified as cis-heterosexual. The teachers within
the coaching group who identified as LGBTQ+ had more of an understanding and knowledge
around cis-heteronormativity and LGBTQ+ issues, histories, and education. However, these four
teachers questioned their own “personal readiness” to disrupt cis-heteronormativity in their
89

classroom. According to Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017), socializing learners have
a need for “external approval that can complicate teaching” and will turn to “valued others for
the ‘best way’” (p. 468). The instrumental teachers did not know as much about cis-
heteronormativity and LGBTQ+ issues, histories, and education, and needed differentiation in
coaching. Instrumental learners tend to “adopt more concrete, transactional, and individualist
approaches,” and need support seeing “beyond the confines of their current practice, perspective
and meaning making” (p. 468).
As literature suggests, teacher training programs are more effective when they involve
intensive forms of support (Devine et al., 2013). Therefore, after initial interviews and data from
the first three sessions, I added two differentiation strategies to the second half of the program: 1)
individualized coaching and 2) a resource list to provide teachers specialized support. In this
section, I discuss how I added individual coaching sessions and created a resource list as
differentiation tools to support teachers in creating a Spring “disruption” project, to help work
towards creating safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students.
Adding Individual Coaching Sessions
Through analysis of initial findings, I decided to add individual coaching sessions to the
program to provide specific coaching interventions, based on each teacher’s needs, to help each
participant create a project that disrupts cis-heteronormativity in their teaching
practices. Individual coaching sessions were optional and presented as supplemental support for
those who self-identified the individual sessions as a need. I ended up facilitating six individual
coaching sessions throughout the second half of the 3-month program. During these sessions,
teachers received individualized coaching and feedback around a specific area. The individual
sessions allowed me to focus on coaching to each teacher’s needs.
90

Individual Coaching Sessions for Socializing Knowers. Out of the six teachers who
signed up for individual coaching sessions, two were socializing and four were instrumental
learners. The two socializing knowers wanted support with developing their project. One
mentioned, “wanting a thought partner to go over some ideas” and the other teacher said, “I want
your feedback on a read aloud project I want to lead with my class.” They both used the time to
share their ideas, trouble shoot, and work out logistics for their projects. These two teachers were
well versed in LGBTQ+ education, issues, and histories. What they needed was a thought
partner, a person with whom to bounce ideas. The individual coaching sessions were an
opportunity for me to provide feedback, ask clarifying questions, and support them with
resources that would help their project. For individual coaching sessions with socializing
teachers, I took a facilitative approach to coaching. Knight (2018) asserts that the facilitative
coach operates as a sounding board for teachers, not sharing their expertise but instead listening
and asking questions. I used this approach to coaching to help socializing teachers develop their
internal capacity to successfully engage in disruptive teaching practices, without needing
external validation (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). During my session with Holly,
for example, I wanted to validate her while asking her questions to help her think more clearly
about her ideas. Here is an excerpt from our individual coaching transcript:
C: Hi Holly, I’m happy you reached out for an individual session. I’m here to help you with
whatever you need. When you made this coaching appointment, you noted that you are
looking to share your ideas about your project with me. You are looking for feedback,
correct?
Holly: Yes, I’m looking to launch a Rainbow Club for the 5-8th grade students. I will be
working with one of the MSW interns and want your thoughts on how the Rainbow Club
91

meetings should run, how often we should have sessions, and what topics we should
cover. I also wanted to talk with you about how to provide information about the club to
families and teachers.
C: Ok great! I’d love to support you. We have 60 minutes today to chat. I will facilitate the
conversation to make sure we cover the agenda items you just mentioned. Feel free to sign
up for another session if we need to follow up or continue chatting about a certain item.
C: Why don’t you start with telling me about the ideas you have for Rainbow Club and what
your vision is for the group.
Holly: I want to host a Rainbow Club that meets weekly. I want to provide a space for middle
schoolers to learn about LGBTQ+ identities, language, and histories. I also want students to
be able to ask questions and participate in critical discussions.
C: This is such a great idea, and much needed at HCNS. So, tell me more about how you’d like
to structure the sessions? Are you thinking about having each session cover a specific topic,
or are you looking to take more of an interdisciplinary approach?
Holly: Because I will be working with an MSW intern, I think it would be more efficient to have
each session cover a different topic. That way, between the two of us, we can take turns
leading sessions. I was thinking that we could spend a session introducing each letter of
LGBTQIA and then go into history, policy, and rights. That is about 9 sessions.
C: That makes sense to create a plan that works for both of you. This way, you can decide how
many sessions you want to hold before the end of the school year, and what topics you want
to cover. I would suggest that you and the intern make a curriculum plan, deciding who will
teach what, working together to make sure there is alignment between topics. Would you like
92

to spend the rest of our time creating a curriculum outline plan to share and revise later with
the intern?
Holly: Yes. That would be helpful.
During this session, I asked questions to help Holly create a curriculum outline plan for Rainbow
Club. As this excerpt showcased, I asked guiding questions, while also validating Holly’s idea. I
wanted to make sure that she felt confident in her planning ideas, while also offering helpful
feedback. As Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017) assert, validation can be a powerful
support for socializing learners and that it's important to offer them ideas and suggestions for
best practices. One thing I would have liked to ask Holly, that I didn’t, was what she would like
to accomplish in Rainbow Club, and what she would like the learning objectives to be. Those
questions would have helped her take ownership in setting her own goals, prompt backwards
planning and providing her a space to build autonomy and confidence as a teacher committed to
disrupting cis-heteronormativity.
Individual Coaching Sessions for Instrumental Knowers. The other four teachers who
signed up for individual coaching were instrumental learners. One teacher wanted help with
creating a project that he could lead based on his knowledge and comfort level, while he took
time to learn more about LGBTQ+ issues, histories, and education. Another teacher wanted to
work through her “imposter syndrome,” to help implement the unit of study she had
created. Therefore, the individual coaching for these two teachers focused on providing
implementation support for their projects. Devine et al. (2013) discuss that the role of a coach is
to make new strategies easy to implement for teachers by providing a “strategy box.” Since
group coaching sessions were a place where teachers critically reflected on how the idea of “not
knowing enough” was impacting their teaching, I spent the individual coaching sessions with
93

these two teachers creating a strategy box. The strategy box was described to teachers as
strategies and tools that they can use to help them develop their Spring “disruption” project. The
following table displays the strategies or tools used to make a “strategy box” during individual
coaching sessions with the instrumental teachers.

94

Table 6
Description of Strategies and Tools
Strategy or Tool Description of Strategy/Tool
Planning Template based
on UBD and HRL
Framework
Based on the Understanding by Design and Historically
Responsive Literacy frameworks, I created a planning template
for instrumental learners to use to help create their spring
disruption project.

Inclusive Language Chart I provided teachers with gender and LGBTQ+ inclusive language
charts for instrumental teachers to learn from and use in their
class.

Critical Media Project I provided teachers with this resource to help in thinking about
how to teach criticality using media.

Heteronormativity is the
Classroom Chart
The teachers and I co created a list of how heteronormativity
shows up in the classroom, school, and how teachers and staff
perpetuate cis-heteronormativity.

Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017) suggest that when working with instrumental
knowers it's best to provide clear expectations, concrete models, and meaningful
resources. Helping teachers develop a strategy box during individual coaching sessions provided
teachers with learning and teaching tools to help them create a Spring “disruption” project. One
teacher mentioned during the exit interview,
I realized that my discomfort around teaching about LGBTQ+ topics was stemming from
privilege, and that I actually have very little to risk and little to fear. The individual
coaching session helped me discuss my hesitations and also, I learned how to use a
strategy box to help me feel more capable disrupting cis-heteronormativity through
teaching my students LGBTQ+ education. This coaching session made the topic less
intimidating to talk about. I feel more equipped to change some of my teaching practices
to be more inclusive.
95

This teacher learned from the individual coaching session strategies to move through their
perception of their LGBTQ+ knowledge and begin to think about how to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity through their teaching practices. The individual coaching sessions were a
necessary addition to the coaching program- helping teachers to work towards a Spring project
focused on disrupting cis-heteronormativity in their classrooms.
Creating a LGBTQ+ Education Resource List
Another way I supported the group was by facilitating the creation of a resource list for
teachers to learn more about cis-heteronormativity and LGBTQ+ education. Along with
coaching teachers to reflect on their fear, positionality, and teaching practices, I found it also
necessary to support instrumental learners by creating a resource list that shared information
about LGBTQ+ histories, issues, and education. For instrumental knowers, it is important to
provide scaffolds such as a resource list to help them move towards socializing knowers (Drago-
Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). I introduced the idea of creating a resource list at our 3rd
coaching session as a response to teachers reflecting on their being a lack of LGBTQ+ inclusive
teaching resources available. During the second half of the coaching program, all teachers—
both instrumental and socializing— found resources and added it to a community list, via Google
Classroom, for teachers to study and learn from. Here are two screenshots from Google
Classroom. Figure 2 shows a participant submission of a resource to add to the community list
by posting it directly on Google Classroom. Figure 3 is a picture of four resources submitted and
relocated to the “Resource” section in Google Classroom.

96

Figure 2
Teacher Resource Submission

Figure 3
Resource List on Google Classroom

97

Resources added to the list included helpful websites, media, specific lesson plans and
curriculum ideas, and teaching tips and strategies. As literature asserts, teachers benefit from
playing an active role in collaborative knowledge construction (Bon & Hager, 2012; Grangeat &
Gray, 2008), and professional development activities have shown to be more effective if they
include collaboration (Coburn & Russell, 2008; Folgeman, Fishmen & Krajcik, 2006). Creating a
LGBTQ+ resource list, together, as a co-construction of knowledge practice, allowed teachers to
participate and collaborate in their own learning while also collectively gathering materials that
are difficult to find by oneself.
Providing both individual coaching sessions and a resource list to learn more about
cis-heteronormativity and LGBTQ+ education was a way for me to recognize that adults are at
different developmental stages. I learned that it is important for me to meet teachers where they
are developmentally. Providing supplemental support and resources, outside of the group
coaching sessions, met the needs of the instrumental participants, while respecting the time,
knowledge, and experience of the socializing participants.
Spring “Disruption” Projects
Through differentiating and course correcting the coaching program to address fear and
different levels of knowing, I was able to support teachers to create a mission and vision
statement for their teaching practice and create a statement of commitment to disrupting cis-
heteronormativity through a specific Spring project. As noted in the conceptual framework,
helping teachers create a Spring project that focused on creating safe and affirming conditions
for each teacher’s classroom was a desired outcome of the coaching program. The nature of these
projects stayed within the realm of the developmental capacity of each teacher. There are
different ways to disrupt cis-heteronormativity based on teacher capacity, knowledge, and
98

comfort level, and I encouraged teachers to create a project that met their developmental needs
while offering differentiated support. In this section I discuss the difference between two
projects— one from an instrumental teacher and one from a socializing teacher—to demonstrate
what teachers were able to accomplish based on the differentiation support they received.
Critical Media Unit- A Project from an Instrumental Knower. John, a third-grade
teacher, wanted to create a project that supported his students’ criticality development, while also
creating space for him to learn more about LGBTQ+ issues, and histories. During session five,
participants reflected on what their mission and vision teaching statements are through the lens
of disrupting cis-heteronormativity and creating safe and affirming conditions for all
students. John created the following mission and vision statement:
Mission Statement: To use my platform to teach students to have and use skills in critical
media literacy by examining heteronormativity and gender in media.
Vision Statement: I envision members in our classroom community noticing and/or
disrupting heteronormativity as it is presented through media, i.e., books, curriculum, and
in our own personal consumption of media.
During John’s individual coaching session, we used his mission and vision statement to create a
plan for his Spring project. He decided to create a critical media unit that he would launch at the
beginning of the next school year. By the end of his individual coaching session, John completed
the first stage of the UBD planning tool (Table 7).

99

Table 7
Stage 1 of UBD Planning Tool
[Stage 1- Desired Results] Title of Unit: Critical Media Project Unit Goals (based on HILL Model)
Identity (How will your teaching help students to
learn something about themselves and or others?)
● Students will learn how media is used to
shape our perception of gender identity.

Skill (What skills and content learning standards are you
teaching?)
● Writing: Students will write opinion pieces on media
and texts, supporting a point of view with reasons.
● Reading: Students will distinguish their own point of
view from the author of a text.
● Math: Students will critically examine word problems
provided by the math curriculum, looking closely at
gender.
Intellect (What will your students become
smarter about?)
● Students will become smarter about
gender and social constructs regarding
gender

Criticality (How will you engage your thinking about power,
equity, and anti-oppression in the text, society, and in the world?)
● Students will learn to examine media critically, focusing
on the social construction of gender and the gender
binary.
● Students will learn to have their own point of view and
opinions on gender.

Using Gholdy Muhammad’s (2020) Histories, Identities, Literacies, and Liberation (HILL)
Model, together John and I were able to think through desired results of his Critical Media
Unit. After the individual coaching session, John completed the rest of the stages of the planning
tool- this included assessment evidence and a learning plan. This UBD planning tool (See
Appendix F) I created based on Understanding by Design (UBD) (Wiggins et al., 2005) and
HILL Model (Muhammad, 2020), helped John create an overview of the unit of study that he
will teach at the beginning of the next school year. This planning template was a tool that was
able to support John at his developmental level. As an instrumental learner, John needed support
with how to disrupt cis-heteronormativity through his lessons. Instrumental learners adapt more
to concrete approaches (Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano, 2017). This planning tool helped
support John to see beyond the confines of his current practice (Drago-Severson and Blum-
DeStefano, 2017), in order to create a unit of study that focuses on disrupting cis-
100

heteronormativity. I did not pressure him to finalize, complete, and teach his unit by the end of
the school year, because I wanted to make sure that my coaching encouraged John to take the
time to use the planning tool to explore the different ways that a teacher can disrupt cis-
heteronormativity through lesson planning.
Gender Expansive Unit of Study/Resource Guide- A Project from a Socializing
Knower. Joy, a first-grade teacher/socializing knower, created a unit of study and resource
guide. Joy, a Queer non-binary teacher, struggled with disrupting cis-heteronormativity because
of fear of parent pushback and also, as a socializing knower, struggled with relying too much on
the opinions or expertise of others around them. For example, during the six-session coaching
group, Joy mentioned 10 times that they either cared too much about what others think about
their work or stated that they felt other people with more knowledge and expertise could disrupt
cis-heteronormativity better than them. Through individual coaching sessions that focused on
developing, expanding, and validating their ideas, Joy was able to create a unit of study and
resource guide to teach to their class; and also, to share with kindergarten- 2
nd
grade teachers at
HCNS. The following artifact (Table 8) is an excerpt from their unit of study that highlights
books they read and some questions, notes, and ideas on how to use the book with students.
Table 8
Gender Expansive Read Aloud Unit and Resource Guide
Activity/Book Guiding Questions/Ideas Notes
Initial Survey

● When you hear the phrases “boy
things” and “girl things,” what do you
think of?
● What, if anything, is for everybody?
● Have students discuss as a whole
group, then individually fill out a chart
with columns for
“boy”/”girl”/”everybody” things
This quick activity helped me to gather
some preliminary data on the ways in
which students perceive and experience
gender. With first graders, I noticed that
they felt compelled to delineate between
what girls can like and what boys can like
-- they didn’t put much in the “for
everyone” category in this initial survey.

101

Red: A Crayon’s Story
by Michael Hall

● What do you notice about Red?
● How do you think he feels when
everyone tries to make him color things
red and it comes out blue?
● What do you notice that all of the other
crayons are saying about him and
telling him to do?
● Is there anything you can think of that
would help Red feel better?
● How do you think the purple crayon
makes Red feel when they ask him to
color the ocean?
● Have you ever felt like Red does in this
story?

This book is great for talking about who
we are on the inside versus how people in
the world might perceive us and the
expectations/ assumptions that are
associated with specific appearances.
Oliver Button Is a
Sissy by Tomie de
Paola

● Themes of bullying for being different
● Can Oliver like these things (drawing,
dancing, dressing up)? What makes
you think so (or not)?
● If someone called you or your friend a
mean name for liking your favorite
things, how would you feel? What
could you say?
● How can we stand up for our friends
when other people hurt them for being
different?
I found that kids connected with this
book because lots of kids like to play
dress-up, draw, dance, and sing! This
book is a pretty easy entry point into
talking about how activities are often
gendered but don’t need to be and
everyone can like whatever they like.

Neither by Airlie
Anderson

● Touches on bullying and difference --
being both/and rather than either/or,
feeling like an outsider and not
belonging to a group
● How do you think Neither feels when
they meet all of these creatures in the
Land of Both? (is that what it’s called)
● This book has some fun language work
in there
This book can kind of go anywhere in
this progression!
They, She, He, Easy as
ABC By Maya
Gonzalez and Matthew

“They” is the most inclusive
pronoun. There are lots of pronouns that
different kids like to use! Gender
exploration is creative and fun
Check out this read-aloud by Ki Gross
from Woke Kindergarten.

102

Julián Is a Mermaid
by Jessica Love

● Highlight how joyful and proud Julián
looks in his fantasies of transforming
into a mermaid -- he’s having fun in his
imagination AND when he’s dressing
up -- he really knows who he is and
what he likes!
● How do you think his abuela is going
to respond when she sees him?
● Have you ever done something (like
get dressed up) while you were alone,
then gotten kind of nervous when a
grown-up or someone comes back and
sees you?
● How do you think Julián feels when
abuela gives him the necklace? How do
you think he feels to be a part of the
parade?

This book is visually gorgeous and has
pretty spare language -- it’s great for a
picture walk and noticing how characters
are feeling.
“Post Unit” Self
Portrait

● Reflect on gender identities and all of
students’ multiple identities
● What makes you, you?
● What do you like to wear? How do you
like to express yourself to the world?
How do you like to be when you’re by
yourself or with your closest friends
and family?
● How would you draw or describe who
you are on the inside?
● It could be great to study some queer
artists and see how they portray
themselves/look at photos (i.e. Frida
Kahlo, Laura Aguilar, Félix González
Torres, Jean-Michel Basquiat, Rafa
Esparza, Keith Haring, clips of Steven
Universe)
● Give students a mirror to look at
themselves as they draw/paint
themselves -- could be from shoulders
up or whole body if they want!
● A good opportunity for talking about
skin color -- provide a wide variety of
paint/pastel colors, talk about mixing
colors to match skin -- language
around how unique everyone’s skin
color is, students can come up with
words to describe their skin color

As the artifact shows, Joy was able to organize their unit of study in a way that shows guiding
questions and notes on how to use each book. Through their project, they were able to showcase
their knowledge and experience with the books, sharing their expertise with their colleagues. Joy
was able to teach their unit of study towards the end of the school year and shared their work
with colleagues with the hope that they would feel encouraged to do some gender expansive
work in their classrooms.
103

At the beginning of the group coaching program, Joy questioned their own readiness to
successfully engage in cis-heteronormative disruption and needed a lot of encouragement and
support to build autonomy and confidence in their disruption work. According to Drago-
Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017), socializing knowers will turn to valued others for the
“best” way. Through two individual coaching sessions, I was able to focus on effective supports
and strategies for growth— for socializing knowers— by inviting Joy to express their own
thoughts about their work; and validate their progress and commitment (Drago-Severson &
Blum-DeStefano, 2017). In our second individual coaching session Joy shared their resource list
with me, and we had the following discussion.
C: Thank you for sharing your work. Can you tell me about your process in creating the
guide? How did you feel about what you created?
Joy: I really enjoyed the process of creating the resource guide. Our first coaching
sessions helped me to really get out of my head and trust my knowledge and skill to
create this resource. I’m excited because I’ve decided to share it with the K-2nd group
of teachers.
C: That’s amazing! I’m so happy that you will be sharing this resource with others.
Joy: Yeah. I know we’ve talked a lot in group sessions about there being a lack of
resources, so I thought this could be a great resource to help other teachers looking to
do some gender work in their classroom.
C: I totally agree! I believe this will be a great resource for other early education
teachers. The work you are doing and creating, Joy is so important! I’m really
excited to hear how your students respond to some of these read alouds and activities,
you will have to keep me posted.
104

Joy: I will. Definitely. I’ll invite you to come visit, virtually, to one of our read aloud
activities in a couple weeks or so.
C: Great!
During this individual coaching session, as noted, I invited Joy to share their own thoughts on
their project and then validated Joy by saying, “the work you are doing and creating is so
important.” I also shared how excited I was that they were sharing their work/resources with
their colleagues. Joy benefited from feedback and validation, which is crucial for socializing
knowers (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Unlike John, an instrumental knower, Joy
did not need concrete tools or examples to help them create their project. They came with the
ideas needed to put together their project. Using a facilitative approach to coaching (Knight,
2018) allowed for me to meet Joy where they were, developmentally, while also guiding their
project in a direction where they felt comfortable to teach and share their work with others. The
Four Ways of Knowing typology was used to help differentiate based on teacher need.
However, I do recognize that teachers will grow and change from one way of knowing to another
based on a multitude of factors, but this study did not collect data to showcase if a participant
moved from one way of knowing to the next.
Part 2: Areas of Growth and Reflection
As noted in my revised conceptual framework, it is important for both me and my
participants to work towards developing a critical and transformative praxis. This being a long-
term goal, I realized that within the 3-month timeframe of this action research study, I was not
able to move from socializing to self-authoring way of knowing (Drago-Severson & Blum-
DeStefano, 2017). I realized that I was not able to move from one way of knowing to the next
complex way of knowing because I was focused on revising and course correcting the coaching
105

curriculum to meet the emotional and developmental needs of the participants to help them work
towards cis-heteronormative disruption and create safe and affirming conditions in the
classroom. In this part, I explore my areas of growth within both my coaching and leadership
practice and show evidence of how I remained a socializing knower through exploring my
challenges with using questioning as a coaching technique and not advocating for participants by
addressing lack of administrative support directly with the executive director at HCNS.
Findings 3: Areas of Growth Needed Within My Coaching and Leadership Practice
The coaching program and action research process unearthed areas of growth needed for
both my coaching and my leadership practice. In this section, I discuss specific coaching and
leadership moves that I did not execute well or at all, and the implications for the coaching
program and my own practice. Through analysis of observational data and critical reflections of
each coaching session, I was able to conclude that I need more experience with using questioning
as a coaching strategy in a group setting, and, as a leader, I need to work directly with the
administration to address teacher fear of parent pushback and lack of administrative support. In
this findings section, I discuss my challenges with asking questions and addressing teacher fear
with administration, and how I was not able to move from socializing to self-authoring way of
knowing as a coach working towards developing a critical and transformative leadership praxis
and noted in my conceptual framework.
Coaching Strategy: Questioning
Questioning is an essential component of many instructional coaching methods, and the
primary effectiveness of the coach lies in their ability to stimulate and guide thinking and
involvement in new topics, strategies, and action steps (Willen, 1987). Willen (1987) also asserts
that questioning is central to recitation, review, discussion, inquiry, and problem solving.
106

Offering effective questioning to guide learner discussion and rational discourse was a challenge
for me in a group setting. I found it a lot easier to ask guiding questions in individual coaching
sessions, opposed to in a group setting. For example, during session five, instead of asking
specific questions to expand a teacher’s reflection, I validated the teacher’s response and moved
on to the next person to share. Here is an excerpt from that interaction.
C: Welcome back. You all just reflected on how you create or have created safe and
affirming conditions for your students. You were prompted to reflect on your own
identity, positionality, and disposition, along with any fear that may arise in relation
to creating safe and affirming conditions for students. Does anyone want to share
from their reflection, to begin our discussion on this topic?
Niko: I can share. One way I think I create safe and affirming conditions is by creating
rules with the students at the beginning of the year that focus on not being bullies. I
wanted to create guidelines that focused on showing up to care for each other.
Working with middle schoolers on this can be challenging, so I would spend the first
six weeks facilitating activities and discussions that helped students to understand
these rules and guidelines.
Michael: I like that. I spend time creating classroom rules with my students, but I don’t
spend a lot of time providing opportunities for them to learn more and fully “buy in”
to these rules.
C: Thank you Niko for sharing. I think creating rules and guidelines with your students
is a great way to set the tone for your class. I also love that you followed up with
activities and discussions that furthered the students’ understanding and like Michael
said, “buy in” of the rules. Would anyone else like to share?
107

As displayed, I was very validating of what Niko said, but did not ask any follow up questions.
As a coach, I could have validated Niko, and asked follow-up questions that helped Niko dive
deeper into what creating safe and affirming conditions would mean within this example she
gave. Questions I could have asked were:
1. What is your experience with student behavior after spending time going over
rules and guidelines at the beginning of the year?
2. Describe some of the activities and discussions that you’ve had with your students
at the beginning of the school year?
3. How do you know that creating rules and guidelines with your students helps
create safe and affirming conditions?
4. How do you follow up with your students throughout the year and check in with
them about the rules and guidelines, if at all?
These questions could have helped Niko share more about why she believes creating rules and
guidelines with students is a way to build safe and affirming conditions. Especially thinking
about Arao and Clemens’ (2013) assertion that spaces are ultimately unsafe for marginalized
communities, it would have been important for me to use questioning to help Niko and others
learn more about creating spaces that cultivate bravery, where students learn to advocate for their
own safety and wellbeing. Using questioning as a tool in group coaching sessions is an important
strategy because it allows other participants to learn from the questions and answers between the
coach and the participant. I did not offer any questions, which did not allow space for Niko and
the other participants to expand their understanding of creating safe and affirming conditions.
As I reflected on why it was difficult for me to ask questions during the coaching session,
what I came to understand was that I get nervous and insecure about my questioning skills within
108

a group setting. In a reflection that I wrote after the fifth session, I addressed this insecurity. I
wrote,
Today, during the coaching session, I realized something very important. It is difficult
for me to ask questions in a group setting. I don’t think I allowed myself to fully
understand how difficult it is for me to use questioning as a coaching technique until this
session. Looking back, it has been difficult. Today participants were talking about how
they create safe and affirming conditions for their students and where they would like to
improve. One teacher mentioned that they create safe and affirming conditions by setting
rules and guidelines that condone bullying and harm in the classroom. They mentioned
how they spend a lot of time in the beginning of the year helping students to fully
understand these guidelines, setting the tone for the school year. I realized that at that
moment, I wanted to ask follow-up questions and the reason I did not was because there
was a level of insecurity around asking questions because I wasn’t sure if the participant
would want to share in a group setting. When I think about it more, insecurity does play a
big role in the coaching strategies I choose to use and don’t use. Looking back at this
coaching session, I realize that questioning is difficult for me, specifically when I am in a
group. I do have a level of insecurity around what the participants think of me and my
coaching.
This reflection helped me to understand the role my insecurities play in my coaching and can be
used as evidence to show that I am still a socializing knower. When I write, “I do have a level of
insecurity around what the participants think of me and my coaching,” is evidence that I still
have a need for “external approval” that can complicate my practice (Drago-Severson & Blum-
DeStefano, 2017). I realized that I am very comfortable with building rapport and validating a
109

teacher’s feelings, experiences, and ideas. However, challenging ideas and having teachers
expand their thoughts and ideas via questioning, specifically in a group is very difficult for me.
Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017) assert, “others’ opinions and assessments make up
socializing knowers’ identities, exposing inner uncertainties and engaging in conflict can feel
like painful threats to one’s inner fabric” (p. 469). Using questioning as a coaching strategy in a
group setting was challenging because I felt like I was exposing my “inner uncertainties.” As a
coach, I see this as a problem, because my goal is to help teachers disrupt the status quo through
my coaching practices. If I am not using questioning to help them expand or challenge their
thinking and teaching practices, then I am not supporting them to work towards disrupting cis-
heteronormativity in their classroom.
After conducting multiple individual coaching sessions, between sessions 4-6, I realized
that it was a lot easier for me to use questioning as a coaching strategy when not in a group
setting. Through these individual coaching sessions, I was able to ask questions without feeling
insecure or concerned about time. In an individual coaching session with Lucas, for example, I
was able to ask questions that helped him to expand on his understanding of his positionality as a
straight cis-teacher looking to disrupt cis-heteronormativity in the classroom.
C: You mentioned in the last group session that you have some fear around teaching
gender and sexuality in the classroom because of fear of not knowing enough. Can
you tell me more about that?
Lucas: Yeah. I really am motivated to create lessons and units of studies that integrate
LGBTQ+ education and history into my lessons. I’ve talked a lot with my teaching
partner and we are planning to create and implement a unit around the book George.
George is about a transgender girl who explores her experience transitioning with her
110

friends, family, and classmates. We have been planning this unit for the last couple
of weeks, and I am realizing how scared I am to begin teaching it. The content is so
important, and I am afraid that because I don’t know enough, I should not be teaching
about LGBTQ+ issues.
C: What do you think are the implications of not teaching this unit or talking with your
students about gender and sexuality?
Lucas: If I don’t teach the language arts unit, then my students won’t learn the valuable
and important lessons from the book George about gender expansiveness. I know
that trans visibility is so important. I had a student, at the beginning of this school
year, who wanted me to move from using she/her to he/him pronouns. Now that I
think about it, it’s vital that I teach this unit.
C: Do you feel like there is a risk to you teaching LGBTQ+ education?
Lucas: I think there is less of a risk with me teaching than my queer/trans colleagues.
They risk being personally harmed, where my fear lies in thinking I don’t know
enough. I think it is important for straight-cis people to use their privilege to teach
and bring awareness to cis-heteronormativity and LGBTQ+ issues.
C: I appreciate your honesty. I do think that identity and positionality play an important
role here. I also understand that this disruptive work is difficult, especially if there is a
level of fear. One perspective that has helped me when teaching topics that I don’t
feel “qualified to teach” is to think about the work as an opportunity to learn with my
students. That we will learn together.
C: What support do you need to help you teach this unit? How can I help you?
111

Lucas: These coaching sessions are helpful. I’d love to be able to check in with you
throughout the unit so I can discuss how it is going, and just have someone to
continue talking to about my fear and insecurities.
C: Ok great. I can definitely continue to meet with you!
By beginning the interaction with an open-ended question (“can you tell me more about that?”) I
was able to access the reason for Lucas’ fear. Asking Lucas then about risks and implications
helped him to realize how important it is for him to teach the unit, despite his fear. In particular, I
asked about the implications of not teaching this unit, which was narrower than the first question,
but it allowed him to think about the alternative to overcoming his fear and teaching it. Rather
than me telling him why it was important for him to move past his fear and to recognize that the
risks to him were not greater than for others who may know more about the issues, I asked Lucas
to derive his own reasons for pushing through the fear. He was able to think about his students
and the importance for his class to learn about gender expansiveness. Questioning is an
important tool for coaches (Knight, 2018). Even though I was not able to use questioning
effectively during group coaching sessions, I was able to use it as an effective tool during the
individual coaching sessions I provided.
Leadership Moves: Addressing Teacher Perception of Lack of Administrative Support
As previously noted, anticipation of parent pushback exacerbated by distance learning
and perceived lack of administrative support played a big role in teacher fear paralysis when
thinking about disrupting cis-heteronormativity in the teacher’s classroom. Teachers reflected on
the fact that the school has not taken a collective stance on providing LGBTQ+ and cis-
heteronormativity education and creating policy that prioritize safety and inclusion.
112

When looking at organizational culture, specifically school culture, defined as “the set of
values and meanings that direct administrators’ and teachers’ behavior,” (Kartal, 2016, p.154),
Kabasakal-Atalay et al. (2015) suggests that school culture should highlight how every
individual within the organization undertakes an equal, active and just role. Also, school culture
affects many school dimensions, including teacher performance (Kartal, 2016). Therefore,
teacher perception of administration greatly impacts the way that teachers will perform. If
teachers feel as if they are not supported, this creates challenges between the teachers and
administration, impacting school culture and the ways in which teachers teach. In the case of this
study, this may result in teachers not wanting to disrupt the status quo by creating safe and
affirming environments for their LGBTQ+ students.
At HCNS, the executive director received a grant to bring me in to lead this coaching
program. Even with her understanding of the coaching program, and intentionally bringing me in
to coach teachers to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and focus on creating safe and affirming
classrooms for LGBTQ+ students, teachers still felt a lack of administrative support when it
came to responding to potential parent pushback, and LGBTQ+ resources and training. What
teachers needed was an adaptive leader as their coach. Given the complex nature of disrupting
cis-heteronormativity and changing the culture of the school to be more inclusive to LGBTQ+
education, it would have been imperative for me to equip myself with adaptive leadership skills
to help teacher’s advocate their need for a more supportive administration. Adaptive leadership
(Heifetz, 1994) is a model of leadership that can equip leaders to navigate the challenges
presented in their organizational context. I failed to directly address teacher concerns about lack
of administrative support and failed to communicate, consensually, their needs and concerns with
the school executive director. I did not use adaptive leadership skills to address the challenges
113

presented by the teachers by directly communicating to the executive director. Instead, when
teachers mentioned a lack of administrative support, I validated their feelings, and focused more
on addressing the fear they were feeling. For example, during session four, teachers shared their
critical reflections, discussing how they feel about talking about gender and sexuality with their
students. Teachers were prompted to acknowledge and explore any fear that comes up when
thinking about teaching LGBTQ+ education. During the discussion, lack of administration
support arose. Instead of holding a discussion with participants to troubleshoot and offer support,
I validated their feelings and moved on. The following excerpt, taken from the session four
transcript, shares this conversation.
C: Who would like to share some thoughts that came up while writing today’s
reflection?
John: I can start. I have a lot of fear about teaching gender and sexuality because I feel
like I don’t know enough, and I also really explored in my writing how topics of
gender and sexuality were off limits to talk about in my family. I think I often tell
myself that I don’t know enough about LGBTQ+ issues, gender, and sexuality, but
after reflecting, I feel that my fear stemmed more from it being a topic that I was not
allowed to discuss.
C: John, you bring up a good point. Oftentimes there is more depth to our fear than we
allow ourselves to understand. Many people in our society are silenced when it comes
to gender and sexuality and it's important to think about that silencing and the
implications it has on us. Great. Would anyone else like to share?
Joy: I can. I was thinking a lot about how I love to talk about gender and sexuality with
little ones, because they get it. However, I am deeply fearful of what their parents
114

might say or do. I don’t think I would be as fearful if I knew that the administration
had support in place to help us deal with parent pushback. Right now, I feel like each
teacher is on their own island, and if they do this disruptive work, they must fend for
themselves.
Tricia: I agree. I am fearful of parent pushback, and I don’t think that the administration
team will have our backs if we were put in a challenging situation. I really want to
feel supported and part of a collective that wants to disrupt heteronormativity.
C: Yeah, I understand. It's a difficult feeling to think that the school administration does
not support you. I know parent pushback is a big fear that a lot of you have spoken
of. Does anyone else have anything to add?
As noted, I did not offer an opportunity to problem solve or offer support. All three teachers
mentioned the same fear, perhaps signaling to me a need to do something about it, given that the
administration had brought me on board to do this coaching program. However, I validated their
feelings by saying, “it’s a difficult feeling to think that the school administration does not support
you,” but I didn’t go on to talk more in depth about this issue, problem solving with teachers, or
offer my support. It was a missed opportunity and given my role as not a teacher in this school, I
could have acted as a co-conspirator, to borrow Love’s (2019) concept.
As a coach, I do believe it is important to address teacher concerns and help them
advocate for their needs to be met. Coaches are viewed as sharing leadership for “instructional
reform” with principals (Taylor, 2008). There is also evidence that coaches can act as mediators
between school reform efforts and classroom practice (Hubbard et al., 2006; Sinnerton, 2007).
Therefore, since the executive director brought me on to facilitate a coaching program meant to
change teacher practices by learning to disrupt cis-heteronormativity, I could have done a better
115

job mediating this reform effort between the teachers and the administration. I did not have a
conversation with the executive director about teacher concerns. At the end of the coaching
program, I reflected on my role as a coach and a leader of the school. I wrote,
I need to understand, as a coach, how to support teachers to develop disruptive practices
to address cis-heteronormativity in the classroom. I need to also explore ways that I can
be disruptive as a coach. Teachers brought up several times during the coaching program
their perception of administrative support and how they felt there was not much support
when it came to LGBTQ+ education and any backlash from students or parents. What is
my role? How could I have supported teachers with this contextual barrier? I need to
understand, that as a coach and leader, it is important for me to understand that
disruption, for me, can include being an agitator, challenging school leaders to think
about the needs of all students, staff and other school community members, not just ones
who are straight and cis-gender. I was not able to do this within the 3-month study.
This reflection showcases a parallel between my individual coaching conversation with Lucas
where I asked him about the risks and consequences of him disrupting cis-heteronormativity and
my inability to take that same risk to advocate for the teachers by directly addressing their issues
with the executive director. Lucas being a cis-gender male, he could lean into and leverage this
dominant identity to be disruptive with less risk. As I reflect, I could have leaned into and
leveraged my dominant identity as a coach who gets along well with the executive director to be
disruptive without as much risk as being a teacher. I could have leveraged my position as a coach
and used adaptive leadership skills to be a co-conspirator (Love, 2019) for the teachers
participating in the coaching group as I suggested Lucas to do in our individual coaching session.
116

As literature suggests, modeling is an effective coaching strategy (Knight, 2006); and I
missed the opportunity to model cis-heteronormative disruption through addressing teacher
needs directly with the executive director. I could have seen the three teachers’ discussion of
their fears as an opening to further discussion about this theme that was arising. Instead of
directly addressing teacher challenges with administration, I focused on coaching teachers to
interrogate and move through their own fear that made all participants feel stuck. In other words,
I placed the onus on them, as individuals with little power in the hierarchy of the school, to find
ways to disrupt without addressing the structural barriers.
As Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017) assert, self-authoring knowers, the next
level from socializing knower, can take a firm stand for others, themselves, and their ideas about
social justice and view conflict as a natural part of advocacy, work, and leadership. As a
socializing knower, looking to move towards self-authoring, it will be important for me to “turn
toward conflict” and address issues sexuality, gender, and the risks of not disrupting cis-
heteronormativity. I do suggest that coaches, myself included, see their role as a disruptor,
challenging administration, policies, and cultural practices that are cis-heteronormative and
extremely harmful.
Conclusion
In summary, this findings section highlights the actions I took to help teachers disrupt
cis-heteronormativity in their classrooms by implementing a 6-session, 3-month group coaching
program. I was able to help teachers understand and address fear and reflect on their positionality
and teaching practices using critical reflection and rational discourse. I was also able to
differentiate the program to meet the developmental needs of participants in order to help
teachers create a Spring “disruption” project. Through this action research process, I learned
117

about my own practice and what areas need growth in order to help me move from socializing to
self-authoring, and work towards developing a critical and transformative leadership praxis.

Afterword
Through this action research self-study dissertation process, I have learned a lot about my own
practice as a coach and the process of creating a 6-session group coaching program geared
towards teachers looking to disrupt cis-heteronormativity in their classrooms. After completing a
three-month study, analyzing the data, and organizing the findings, I have created an
instructional guide (see Appendix E) that coaches can use as a tool in their coaching practice. In
this section I reflect on my own growth as a coach, and what I have learned from this process. I
also discuss implications of my findings; focusing specifically on exploring ways that coaches
can use the instructional guide created within the context of their own practice, and what my
plans are moving forward.
Growth as A Coach
Through this 3-month action research study and dissertation writing process I have
learned a lot about myself as a coach and school leader. This subsection will be divided into two
parts: 1) how I gained confidence as a Queer coach, and 2) a look into my current understanding
of being a coach and school leader dedicated to disruptive and transformative practices that help
create safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ communities.
Gaining Confidence as a Queer Coach
I have worked at HCNS for 13 years in various capacities as an educator and social
worker. I could not have imagined, when I first started at HCNS, professionally “coming out” as
Queer and focusing my work on coaching teachers to examine their positionality and teaching
118

practices in order to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity and cultivating safe and
affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students in their classroom. Any work I have done,
informally, to disrupt cis-heteronormativity at HCNS has come from the persona as a “straight”
professional. I felt there was a protection that came with being “straight,” which allowed me to
be more comfortable disrupting cis-heteronormativity within the work that I was doing. I have
always 1) had a fear that I would be verbally and emotionally harmed by students, parents, and
colleagues, and 2) believed that I would be labeled as just another person with a self-interested
agenda if I came out and also disrupted cis-heteronormativity. My fear was rooted in internalized
oppression and fear of going against the status quo.
As I began planning for my action research study, through critical reflections, I did a lot
of processing of my own internalized shame I felt about being “out” in a professional space.
Through this action research dissertation process, I’ve concluded that me showing up as my
authentic self is, in itself, an act of disruption. Authentic means to be true to one’s own
personality, spirit, or character (Merriam-Webster, 2021). When I choose to be authentic, I’m
choosing to be visibly Queer- not conforming to society’s construct of identity. This is a
disruptive act. If I am honest with who I am, then I will be able to model and be of support to
not only other queer educators, but all participants who are interested in and understand the
importance of doing this work of cis-heteronormative disruption. As a coach this will help me
navigate the power dynamic in the hierarchy of schools while showing teachers how to do the
same.
During the first coaching session I shared my Queer identity with participants— it was
the first time I’ve done that at HCNS. I let them know the reason that I was starting this program
and how it was important for me to be out as Queer. After I shared, others were invited to share
119

why they joined, and 4 out of the 8 participants introduced themselves as part of the LGBTQ+
community. It was the first time that two had “come out” to a group of teachers at the school.
They shared how they were excited to be in a space where they can be “out” and a teacher. It was
a meaningful experience for all of us to be able to show up as our whole selves so early in the
program.
Being open as Queer has greatly impacted my confidence as a coach. I feel more
liberated in my own abilities because I was able to connect with my own identity to inform my
practice. Being able to bring my lived experience and knowledge to my coaching, allowed me to
create space for others to do the same. One of my goals was to create a space that focused on
bravery more than safety. Choosing to be authentic and visibly Queer was a brave choice I made
to help set the tone for others. As a coach, I realized that being authentic in my practice allowed
me to connect with teachers in deep and meaningful ways, an interactional necessity when
working to collectively disrupt the status quo. In other words, being authentic was very important
when facilitating a coaching program that focused on a subject as sensitive as cis-
heteronormativity.
Current Understanding of my Practice
Creating, implementing, and analyzing my 6-session coaching program through my
action research dissertation study helped me to understand my current coaching practice. I have
learned a lot about my positionality as a coach; the presence and impact of fear; and how to use
coaching and transformative learning theories to inform my practice. Understanding my practice,
at the current moment, will help me as I move forward as a coach looking to disrupt and, in turn,
support teachers in disrupting cis-heteronormativity and creating safe and affirming conditions
for LGBTQ+ marginalized students.
120

Understanding my Positionality as a Coach
Through this dissertation process, I have learned that my positionality as a coach
includes: 1) my social identity and experience, 2) my knowledge of systems of oppression, and
3) my relationship with school stakeholders and where I am perceived to be positioned within the
social and political school hierarchy. My identity, including my race, sexuality, and gender have
greatly shaped my experiences in life. The way that I coach is also greatly shaped by my
experiences, as navigated through these identities. What I have learned, through this action
research study, is to draw on my identity and experiences as tools to relate to and coach others.
Through reflection, I found that I often doubt my credibility as a coach because I rely heavily on
my own experiences when coaching or teaching about social justice topics. What I have come to
understand is that my identities and experiences are, in fact, valid and acceptable sources of
knowledge. Meyers (2010) discusses three types of knowledge- experienced knowledge, floating
knowledge, and aloha knowledge (in service to others). She asserts that experiences develop
knowledge that turns into knowing. I, based on my experiences and identities, have a lot to share
with others. With that being said, since deciding to create an action research dissertation study
that focuses on disrupting cis-normativity in racially marginalized communities, I have since
done a lot of research on the intersection of race, gender, and sexuality, and how to use this
content in my coaching practice. Relying on research, which Meyer (2010) would suggest is
floating knowledge, knowledge separate from our experiences, along with my own experience
and the experience of my participants, helped create transformative learning experiences for both
me and my participants. I have learned that coaches must value and use different sources of
knowledge in order to best position their learners for success, helping them to understand aloha
knowledge (Meyer, 2010)—knowing that leads to understanding how to be of service to others.
121

Lastly, I have learned that my positionality as a coach is greatly influenced by school
stakeholders. As a coach, I was positioned as a guide and expert for the teachers participating in
the program. As mentioned, in findings 3, I struggled with understanding how to use my
positional authority to support and advocate for the teachers by communicating concerns directly
with the executive director. Because I have such a long-standing relationship with HCNS, it was
hard for me to navigate my position as a coach. I did not feel confident offering the executive
director critical feedback because I did not want to get stuck in the middle between her and the
teachers. I have worked at HCNS as a teacher and a school social worker, and as a social worker,
my role changed where I was often put in the middle between a teacher or staff and the executive
director. I did not want to feel like I was stuck in the middle as a coach, and therefore reframed
from advocating for the teachers. Moving forward, I hope to bring my coaching program to other
schools and educational institutions. Therefore, it will be important for me to understand my
positionality, and how I want to position myself as a coach dedicated to disrupting cis-
heteronormativity within my own practice and support teachers to do the same within the context
of their work. What I need to do moving forward is to plan for ways I can serve as an agitator
and co-conspirator, using my spheres of control and influence to support and advocate for the
voices from below.
Understanding the Presence of Fear
Fear was found to be a major barrier for teachers looking to be disruptive in their
classroom. I also learned, through this dissertation process, that fear has played a big role in my
experience as a teacher, social worker and currently, a coach and school leader. When I think
about fear, and the way it shapes my current practice, I can’t help but to explore the connection
between fear, repressive silence, and socialization into systems of oppression. It is not a
122

coincidence that fear showed up for me and all eight participants. Harro (2000) discusses the
cycle of socialization and how fear is one of five themes that keep people in the cycle. He
asserts, “for targets, fear of interrupting the system reminds us of what happens to targets who
challenge the existing power structure: being labeled as ‘troublemakers”, experiencing
discrimination, being deported, beaten, institutionalized, imprisoned, or killed” (Harro, 2000, p.
51). Through this process, I have come to understand fear as a catalyst for growth, something to
attend to intentionally so as to break the cycle of socialization. Understanding fear as a byproduct
of the socialization into systems of oppression has helped me become a more compassionate and
determined coach and leader. I understand that fear is not something to be ashamed of, but
something to understand and connect to internalized oppression. Being present to and really
seeing the way in which fear is inextricably linked to the reproduction of the status quo makes
me dedicated now more than ever to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and other forms of oppression
with the work that I do. To quote Audre Lorde, “when I dare to be powerful- to use my strength
in the service of my vision, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid.”
Understanding how to use Theory in Practice
As noted in the conceptual framework, critical social and transformative learning theories
were two theories that grounded my six-session group coaching program. These two theories had
not informed my practice prior to this dissertation action research study. Through my findings, I
have learned that transferring theory to practice can be challenging. What is difficult is fully
understanding the theory enough to use in practice. Coaching strategies, creating a brave space,
providing feedback, and questioning, were found to be imperative strategies to create conditions
to teach participants how to use critical reflection and rational discourse as tools to reflect on
their positionality and teaching practices in order to disrupt cis-heteronormativity in their
123

classrooms. What made it difficult to put these strategies into practice were the limitations of
meeting virtually due to Covid-19, the 3-month time frame, and research not having many
examples of how to transfer theory to practice. Moving forward, I will continue to research,
study, and practice these specific coaching and transformative learning strategies in preparation
for future coaching roles.
Implications for Coaches
This dissertation action research study is meant to help me understand my practice in
transformative ways, to inform my work moving forward, and also help other instructional
coaches implement social justice themed topics into their practice. By developing an
instructional guide informed by my action research findings, I am hoping it can be used as a tool
for other instructional coaches and school leaders who are looking to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity in their own school contexts. Based on my findings, I have revised the
coaching curriculum with which I began this dissertation in practice and created an instructional
guide. In this subsection I discuss three ways that instructional coaches or school leaders can use
this instructional guide within the scope of their organization.
Learning Groups for Interested School Stakeholders
As noted, I worked with a group of eight teachers at HCNS who were interested in the
program and chose to sign up to participate in the six-session group coaching program. Working
with teachers who were interested in learning how to disrupt cis-heteronormativity provided a
level of “buy-in” from the beginning. Oftentimes, teacher-buy is important for engagement and
participation in professional learning experiences provided to them. Thomson et al. (1999)
describes two types of buy in: intellectual and emotional. Intellectual captures the degree of
understanding and emotional the degree of commitment (Thomson et al., 1999). Therefore, one
124

way to use this curriculum is to offer it to interested members of the school community. This can
mean offering it to only teachers or expanding the offer to other school stakeholders such as
other staff members and parents. Another way to offer this coaching program to school
stakeholders would be, at a district level or schools partnering together, offering small group
coaching to multiple school sites, building a community of people interested in disrupting cis-
heteronormativity across contexts rather than within them. Based on who this curriculum is
offered to, the instructional guide may need to be revised to meet the characteristics of who is
participating (i.e., revise critical reflection prompt to emulate the professional responsibilities of
the participants). One purpose to creating an instructional guide to share with others, is to offer a
tool that is self-explanatory for coaches, leaders, and others to use given the realization that
grants to hire experts or coaches is limited. Having an experienced coach or facilitator is
important, however, having a tool, such as the instructional guide, will provide access to support
for more learning communities looking to disrupt cis-heteronormativity.
Professional Learning
Another way to use this instructional guide is to offer it as a school-wide professional
learning resource. Richardson (2003) believes that staff development conducted with K-12
teachers derives from a short-term transmission model; paying no attention to what is going on in
a particular classroom, school, or district; offers little opportunity for participants to become
involved in the conversation; and provides no follow-up. As research suggests, professional
development should be schoolwide, long-term with follow up, foster agreement among
participants on goals and vision, have a support administration, and acknowledge participants’
existing beliefs and practices (Huberman, 1989; Richardson, 1998; Berlak & Berlak, 1981; King
& Newmann, 1999). Given this coaching program was designed as a 6-week program that
125

focuses on the participants’ own practice, this instructional guide can be used to help foster a
long term, school-wide commitment to disrupting cis-heteronormativity through developing
critical reflection and rational discourse skills to interrogate one’s positionality and practices. An
instructional coach or school leader can study the guide and use it to facilitate school-wide
professional development sessions that can be six sessions in length or expanded to 12 (each
session broken into two parts to allow more time to discuss and deepen each topic).
Instructional Guide Transferability
Lastly, it is important to note that the instructional guide/program curriculum focuses on
how to use critical reflection and rational discourse as tools to reflect on one’s positionality and
teaching practices in order to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming
conditions in the classroom. However, I do believe that the guide can be a comprehensive tool to
coach others about other social justice topics, such as: racism, patriarchy, disability
justice/ableism, and more. The instructional guide can be used as a template to adapt to other
social justice topics, as needed. We can use critical reflection and rational discourse as tools to
interrogate, critically examine, and transform conditional thoughts, internalized oppression, and
biases to create safe and affirming classrooms for all students. Also, it is important to note the
participants for my study were self-selected volunteers. The demographic of participants were
very diverse in race/ethnicity, gender, and sexuality. However, this curriculum is geared towards
all people, even teachers with more dominant social identities. This coaching program, focused
on critical reflection and rational discourse, embraces the beauty and challenges that comes with
diversity.
Implications for My Practice
126

As I look back on this journey, I am very proud to have created an instructional guide that
I can continue to use and modify and offer to others interested in disrupting cis-
heteronormativity in the context of where they work or are in community. I have learned a lot
about the action research process and hope to continue elements of this action research into
another iteration of planning and executing actions. I hope to focus on learning more about how
to use the four ways of knowing (Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano, 2017) to differentiate,
meet participant needs, and help myself and others move from one way of knowing to the next. I
also hope to use a “next cycle” of the action research study, to learn different ways to
differentiate the program to incorporate other social justice topics, such as racism, patriarchy,
and disability justice, as mentioned above. I believe that critical reflection and rational discourse
can help teachers interrogate their positionality and teaching practice in regard to disrupting
these other forms of oppression.
My plan, moving forward, is to continue to grow this coaching program at HCNS, and
hopefully expand to other schools, districts, and community organizations looking to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity and reimagine what safety can look and feel like for racially marginalized
LGBTQ+ students. I also hope to continue to develop my own critical reflection practice, in
hopes to continue to transform my practice, moving from socializing to self-authoring and then
self-transforming way of knowing (Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano, 2017). This may take
a lifetime to get to the point of developing a critical and transformative praxis, but I am dedicated
to trying.

127

References
Adams, N., Cox, T., & Dunstan, L. (2004). ‘I Am the Hate that Dare Not Speak its Name’:
Dealing with homophobia in secondary schools. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 20(3), 259-269.
Alsup, J., & Miller, S. J. (2014). Reclaiming English education: Rooting social justice in
dispositions. English Education, 46(3), 195-215.
Arao, B., & Clemens, K. (2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces. The art of effective
facilitation: Reflections from social justice educators, 135-150.
Asher, N. (2007). Made in the (multicultural) USA: Unpacking tensions of race, culture, gender,
and sexuality in education. Educational Researcher 36(2), 65-73.
Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., & McLaughlin-Volpe, T. (2004). An organizing framework for
collective identity: Articulation and significance of multidimensionality. Psychological
Bulletin, 130, 80–114.
Athanases, S. Z., & Larrabee, T. G. (2003). Toward a consistent stance in teaching for equity:
Learning to advocate for lesbian-and gay-identified youth. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 19(2), 237-261.
Baams, L., Grossman, A. H., & Russell, S. T. (2015). Minority stress and mechanisms of risk for
depression and suicidal ideation among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Developmental
Psychology, 51(5), 688–696. doi:10.1037/a0038994
Bell, L. A. (2010). Storytelling for social justice: Connecting narrative and the arts in antiracist
teaching. Routledge.
Berlak, A., & Berlak, H. (2011). Dilemmas of schooling: Teaching and social change (Vol. 165).
Routledge.
128

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1997). Qualitative research for education. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Boylan, M., & Woolsey, I. (2015). Teacher education for social justice: Mapping identity
spaces. Teaching and Teacher Education, 46, 62-71.
Boser, S. (2006). Ethics and power in community-campus partnerships for research. Action
Research, 4(1), 9-21.
Brockenbrough, E. (2013). Introduction to the special issue: Queers of color and anti‐oppressive
knowledge production. Curriculum Inquiry, 426-440.
Brookfield, S. (1995). Adult learning: An overview. International encyclopedia of education, 10,
375-380.
Brookfield, S. D. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. John Wiley & Sons.
Brookfield, S. D. (2018). Teaching race: How to help students unmask and challenge racism.
John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, K. M. (2004). Leadership for social justice and equity: Weaving a transformative
framework and pedagogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 77-108.
Campbell, P. F., & Malkus, N. N. (2011). The impact of elementary mathematics coaches on
student achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 111(3), 430-454.
Cantrell, S. C., & Hughes, H. K. (2008). Teacher efficacy and content literacy implementation:
An exploration of the effects of extended professional development with
coaching. Journal of Literacy Research, 40(1), 95-127.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. Sage.
Chaub, S., Laub, C., & Wall, S. (2004). Beyond the binary: A tool kit for gender identity
activism in schools. San Francisco, CA: National Centre for Gay and Lesbian Rights.
129

Crenshaw, Kimberle (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black
Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist
Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum: Vol. 1989: 1, Article 8.
Coburn, C., & Russell, J. (2008). Getting the most out of professional learning communities and
coaching: Promoting interactions that support instructional improvement. Learning
Policy Brief, 1(3), 1-5.
Corbin, J. Strauss (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. London, United Kingdom: Sage Publication Ltd.
Cross, W. E. J. (1991). Shades of black: Diversity in African- American identity. Philadelphia,
PA:Temple University Press.
Davis, T. S., Saltzburg, S., & Locke, C. R. (2009). Supporting the emotional and psychological
wellbeing of sexual minority youth: Youth ideas for action. Children and Youth Services
Review, 31(9), 1030–1041.
D’Augelli, A. R., Pilkington, N. W., & Hershberger, S. L. (2002). Incidence and mental health
impact of sexual orientation victimization of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths in high
school. School Psychology Quarterly, 17, 148–167.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What
matters. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46-53.
Delgado, R. (86). Stefancic,(2001). Critical race theory: An introduction.
DePalma, R., & Jennett, M. (2010). Homophobia, transphobia, and culture: Deconstructing
heteronormativity in English primary schools. Intercultural Education, 21(1), 15-26.
Devine, M., Houssemand, C., & Meyers, R. (2013). Instructional coaching for teachers: A
strategy to implement new practices in the classrooms. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
130

Sciences, 93, 1126-1130.
Douglas, T. R., & NGANGA, C. (2015). WHAT'S RADICAL LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT:
Navigating Identity, Pedagogy, and Positionality in Pre-Service Education. International
Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 6(1).
Drago-Severson, E. (2012). Helping educators grow: Strategies and practices for leadership
development. Harvard Education Press.
Drago-Severson, E., & Blum-DeStefano, J. (2017). The self in social justice: A developmental
lens on race, identity, and transformation. Harvard Educational Review, 87(4), 457-481.
Dunst, C. J., & Trivette, C. M. (2009). Capacity-building family-systems intervention
practices. Journal of Family Social Work, 12(2), 119-143.
Dwyer, S. C., & Buckle, J. L. (2009). The space between: On being an insider-outsider in
qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(1), 54-63.
Fielding, N., & Fielding, J. L. (1986). Linking Data (Vol. 4). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Fogleman, J., Fishman, B., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Sustaining innovations through lead teacher
learning: A learning sciences perspective on supporting professional
development. Teaching Education, 17(2), 181-194.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herter and Herter.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1972). Cultural action for freedom (Vol. 48). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed (revised). New York: Continuum.
Gamson, J. (2000). Sexualities, queer theory, and qualitative research. Handbook of Qualitative
Research, 2, 347-365.
Gibbons, L. K., & Cobb, P. (2017). Focusing on teacher learning opportunities to identify
131

potentially productive coaching activities. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(4), 411-425.
Glesne, C. (1999). Become qualitative researchers.
Grangeat, M., & Gray, P. (2008). Teaching as a collective work: analysis, current research and
implications for teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 34(3), 177-189.
Gumbs, A. P., & Imarisha, W. (2015). Octavia's Brood: Science Fiction Stories from Social
Justice Movements.
Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge of human interests. Boston: Beacon.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Vol. 1: Reason and the rationalization
of society (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon.
Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a
category of bourgeois society (T. B. a. F. Lawrence, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
(Original work published in 1962)
Hager, G. W., Belt, K. T., Stack, W., Burgess, K., Grove, J. M., Caplan, B., ... & Groffman, P.
M. (2013). Socioecological revitalization of an urban watershed. Frontiers in Ecology
and the Environment, 11(1), 28-36.
Haritaworn, J. (2008). Shifting positionalities: Empirical reflections on a queer/trans of colour
methodology. Sociological Research Online, 13(1), 162-173.
Harro, B. (2000). The cycle of socialization. Readings for Diversity and Social Justice, 2, 45-51.
Heifetz, R. A., & Heifetz, R. (1994). Leadership without easy answers (Vol. 465). Harvard
University Press.
Hensley, L. G., Smith, S. L., & Thompson, R. W. (2003). Assessing competencies of counselors‐
in‐training: Complexities in evaluating personal and professional
development. Counselor Education and Supervision, 42(3), 219-230.
132

Hubbard, L., & Datnow, A. (2015). Teachers’ use of assessment data to inform instruction:
Lessons from the past and prospects for the future. Teachers College Record, 117(4), 1-
26.
Huberman, M. (1989). The professional life cycle of teachers. Teachers College Record, 91(1),
31-57.
Icard, L. D. (1986). Black gay men and conflicting social identities: Sexual orientation versus
racial identity. Journal of Social Work & Human Sexuality, 4(1-2), 83-93.
Jay, J. K., & Johnson, K. L. (2002). Capturing complexity: A typology of reflective practice for
teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 73-85.
Jackson, S. (2006). Interchanges: Gender, sexuality and heterosexuality: The complexity (and
limits) of heteronormativity. Feminist Theory, 7(1), 105-121.
Johnson, G. (2019). All Boys Aren’t Blue A Memoir Manifesto. Farrar Straus Giroux. New York.
Kartal, S. E. (2016). Determining school administrators’ perceptions on institutional culture: A
qualitative study. Educational Process: International Journal (EDUPIJ), 5(2), 152-166.
Kagan, D. M. (1990). Ways of evaluating teacher cognition: Inferences concerning the
Goldilocks principle. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 419-469.
Kartal, S. E. (2016). Determining school administrators’ perceptions on institutional culture: A
qualitative study. Educational Process: International Journal (EDUPIJ), 5(2), 152-166.
Kegan, R., Kegan, L. L. L. R., & Lahey, L. L. (2009). Immunity to change: How to overcome it
and unlock potential in yourself and your organization. Harvard Business Press.
King, M. B., & Newmann, F. M. (1999, April). School capacity as a goal for professional
development: Mapping the terrain in low-income schools. In annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
133

Kitchen, J., & Bellini, C. (2012). Addressing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer
(LGBTQ) issues in teacher education: Teacher candidates’ perceptions. Alberta Journal
of Educational Research, 58(3), 444-460.
Kitchenham, A. (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow's transformative learning
theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(2), 104-123.
Knight, J. (2018). A coaching model for classroom management. Educational Leadership, 76(1),
50-51.
Kosciw, J. G., Greytak, E. A., Zongrone, A. D., Clark, C. M., & Truong, N. L. (2018). The 2017
National School Climate Survey: The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,
Transgender, and Queer Youth in Our Nation's Schools. Gay, Lesbian and Straight
Education Network (GLSEN).
Kumashiro, K. K. (2004). Preface. In K. K. Kumashiro (Ed.), Restoried selves: Autobiographies
of queer Asian/Pacific American activists (pp. xix–xxv). New York: Harrington Park.
Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2002). I ain’t writin’nuttin’: Permissions to fail and demands to succeed in
urban classrooms. The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the
classroom, 107-120.
Lorde, A. (1982). Who said It was simple. The collected poems of Audre Lorde, 92.
Loutzenheiser, L. W., & MacIntosh, L. B. (2004). Citizenships, sexualities, and
education. Theory into Practice, 43(2), 151-158.
Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the
pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press.
Magolda, M. B. B. (2009). The activity of meaning making: A holistic perspective on college
134

student development. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 621-639.
Maher, F. & Tetrault (1994). The Feminist Classroom.
Marchia, J., & Sommer, J. M. (2019). (Re) defining heteronormativity. Sexualities, 22(3), 267-
295.
Martin, R. J., & Van Gunten, D. M. (2002). Reflected identities: Applying positionality and
multicultural social reconstructionism in teacher education. Journal of Teacher
Education, 53(1), 44-54.
Matsuda, M. J., Lawrence III, C. R., Delgado, R., & Crenshaw, K. W. (1993). Words that
wound: Critical race theory. Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment, 5.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Applied social research methods series: Vol. 41. Qualitative research
design: An interactive approach, 3.
McCready, L. T. (2013). Conclusion to the special issue: Queer of color analysis: Interruptions
and pedagogic possibilities. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(4), 512-522.
Merriam, S., & Caffarella, R. (1999). Key theories of learning. Learning in adulthood: a
comprehensive guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2, 248-266.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Meyer, IH. Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations:
conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin. 2003;129:674–697.
Meyer, AM (2010). Manu Aluli Meyer on Epistomology [Video].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmJJi1iBdzc&t=188s
Mezirow, J. (1990). How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. Fostering critical

135

reflection in adulthood, 1(20), 1-6.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass, 350 Sansome
Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1310.
Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms of learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 46(3),
158-172.
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New directions for adult and
continuing education, 1997(74), 5-12.
Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(3), 185-198.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook.
Sage.
Misawa, M. (2010). Queer race pedagogy for educators in higher education: Dealing with power
dynamics and positionality of LGBTQ students of color. The International Journal of
Critical Pedagogy, 3(1), 26.
Muhammad, G. (2020). Cultivating genius: An equity framework for culturally and historically
responsive literacy. Scholastic Incorporated.
Musto, A., Stein, K., Schill, K., Eisenkolb, A., & Brauer, W. (1999, August). Qualitative motion
representation in egocentric and allocentric frames of reference. In International
Conference on Spatial Information Theory (pp. 461-476). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Neuman, S. B., & Cunningham, L. (2009). The impact of professional development and
coaching on early language and literacy instructional practices. American Educational
Research Journal, 46(2), 532-566.
Oswald, R. F., Blume, L. B., & Marks, S. R. (2005). Decentering heteronormativity: A model for
family studies. Sourcebook of Family Theory and Research, 143-165.
136

Oswald, R. F., Kuvalanka, K. A., Blume, L. B., & Berkowitz, D. (2009). Queering “the
family.” Handbook of feminist family studies, 43-55.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice. Sage Publications.
Pennell, S. M. (2016). Queer cultural capital: Implications for education. Race Ethnicity and
Education, 19(2), 324-338.
Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity development in minority group adolescents.
Journal of Early Adolescence, 9, 34–49.
Poteat, V. P., Aragon, S. R., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. W. (2009). Psychosocial concerns of
sexual minority youth: Complexity and caution in group differences. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77(1), 196.
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say
about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
Quinnan, T. W. (1997). Adult students" at-risk": Culture bias in higher education (Vol. 1064,
No. 8615). Greenwood Publishing Group.
Reid, H., Bimrose, J., & Brown, A. (2016). Prompting reflection and learning in career
construction counseling. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 97, 51-59.
Richardson, V. (2003). The dilemmas of professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(5),
401-406.
Rofes, E. (1995). Making schools safe for sissies. Rethinking Schools, 9(3), 8-9.
Rogers, L. O., Scott, M. A., & Way, N. (2015). Racial and gender identity among Black
Adolescent males: An intersectionality perspective. Child Development, 86(2), 407-424.
Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., & Hunter, J. (2004). Ethnic/racial differences in the coming-
137

out process of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: A comparison of sexual identity
development over time. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 10, 215
228.
Rosinski, C. R. (2021). Disrupting Cis/Heteronormativity and Interrogating Whiteness: The
Advancement of Counseling Through Critical Sex Education (Doctoral dissertation,
Lesley University).
Russell, S. T., Seif, H., & Truong, N. L. (2001). School outcomes of sexual minority youth in the
United States: Evidence from a national study. Journal of Adolescence, 24(1), 111-128.
Ryan, C. L., & Hermann-Wilmarth, J. M. (2018). Reading the rainbow: LGBTQ-inclusive
literacy instruction in the elementary classroom. Teachers College Press.
Sadowski, M. (2016). Safe is not enough: Better schools for LGBTQ students. Harvard
Education Press.
Saric, M., & Steh, B. (2017). Critical reflection in the professional development of teachers:
Challenges and possibilities. CEPS Journal, 7(3), 67-85.
Settles, I. H. (2006). Use of an intersectional framework to understand Black women’s racial and
gender identities. Sex Roles, 54, 589–601. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9029-8
Stiegler, B. (2008). Our ailing educational institutions. Culture Machine, 5.
Stillman, J. (2009). Taking back the standards: Equity-minded teachers' responses to
accountability-related instructional constraints. The New Educator, 5(2), 135-160.
Stotzer, R. L. 2009. Violence against Transgender People: A Review of United States Data.
Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (3): 170–179.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Psychology
of Inter-Group Relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall
138

Taylor, V. (2000). Emotions and identity in women’s self-help movements. Self, identity, and
social movements, 13, 271-299.
Taylor, E. (2000). Fostering Mezirow's transformative learning theory in the adult education
classroom: A critical review. Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 14(2),
1-28.
Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1989). Rousing schools to life. American Educator, 13(2), 20-25.
Toomey, R. B., McGuire, J. K., & Russell, S. T. (2012). Heteronormativity, school climates, and
perceived safety for gender nonconforming peers. Journal of Adolescence, 35(1), 187-
196.
Trivette, C. M., Dunst, C. J., Hamby, D. W., & O’Herin, C. E. (2009). Characteristics and
consequences of adult learning methods and strategies. Research Brief, 3(1), 1-33.
Turner, K. L., & Brown, C. S. (2007). The centrality of gender and ethnic identities across
individuals and con- texts. Social Development, 16, 700–719
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Socio-cultural theory. Mind in society, 6, 52-58.
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: race, social fit, and
achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82.
Wergin, J. F. (2019). Deep learning in a disorienting world. Cambridge University Press.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). Melbourne,
Victoria: Hawker Brownlow Education.
Wilen, W. W. (1987). Questions, questioning techniques, and effective teaching. NEA
Professional Library, PO Box 509, West Haven, CT 06516.
Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Chapter 6: Teacher Learning and the Acquisition of
Professional Knowledge: An Examination of Research on Contemporary Professional
139

Development. Review of research in education, 24(1), 173-209.
Yosso, Tara J. 2005. “Whose Culture Has Capital? A Critical Race Theory Discussion of
Community Cultural Wealth.” Race Ethnicity and Education 8 (1): 69–91.

140

Appendix A: Interview Protocol
Initial Interview Protocol (pre 3-month study)
I. Introduction:
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time that you have
set aside to answer my questions. As I mentioned when we last spoke, the interview should take
about an hour, does that still work for you?
Before we get started, I want to remind you about the purpose of the study and answer
any questions you might have about participating in this interview. I am a student at USC and am
conducting a self-study action research project on the critical reflection coaching program I am
implementing at HCNS. I’m asking a subgroup of 6-9 teachers to volunteer to participate in the
study portion. I am interested in examining my coaching program to better understand the ways I
can support teachers in understanding their positionality and their teaching practices. I am hoping
this deeper understanding will enable teachers to begin disrupting heteronormativity in their
classroom by cultivating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+
students. I will be interviewing all teacher participants before and after the 3-month study
portion of the professional development coaching program. In addition to interviewing teachers
to find out how I am facilitating your learning, I am also observing my own practice by recording
our coaching sessions via Zoom and collecting critical reflections from each participant, while
also analyzing my own critical reflections.
I want to assure you that I am strictly wearing the hat of a researcher today. What this
means is that the nature of my questions are not evaluative. I will not be making any judgments
on how you are performing as a teacher. This interview is also confidential. What that means is
141

that your name will not be shared with anyone outside of the research team in connection to the
perspective you provide. I will not share them with other teachers, the principal, or the district.
The data for this study will be compiled and analyzed for my dissertation and while I do plan on
using some of what you say as direct quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed to you. I
will use a pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and will try my best to de-identify any of
the data I gather from you. I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final dissertation if you
are interested.
As stated in the Study Information Sheet I shared with you, I will keep the data in a
password protected computer and all data will be destroyed after 3 years.
Might you have any questions about the study before we get started? I have brought a recorder
with me today so that I can accurately capture what you share with me. The recording is solely
for my purposes to best capture your perspectives and will not be shared with anyone outside the
research team. May I have your permission to record our conversation?
II. Setting the Stage (for first interview only):
I’d like to start by asking you some background questions about you.
1. First, could you tell me about your background in education?
How did you become interested in the field of education?
a. How long have you worked in the field?
b. What roles or positions have you held?

III. Heart of the Interview:
Now I’d like to ask you some questions that pertain to your identity as a teacher.
2. Tell me about your identity?
a. What identities are most salient for you?
3. How do your identities (you’ve specified) shape how you interact with your students in
the classroom?
142

4. What do you believe is the purpose of schooling?
5. How do think who you are influences the way you see schooling?
6. How has your own beliefs about school and teaching changed over time?
a. What prompted this change?
7. How has your own beliefs about school and teaching stayed the same over time?
8. Some say it’s important for teachers to take a self-reflexive approach in examining their
own identities, beliefs, and stances? What are your thoughts?
9. How would you define positionality as it relates to teaching?
a. Do you believe a teacher’s positionalities impact the way they teach? If so,
how? If no, why?
Now I will ask you questions pertaining to your teaching practice.
10. What influences your teaching practice? Former teachers? Other adults? Specific beliefs
and values?
11. What do you believe shapes a student’s educational experience?
a. How is this reflected in your teaching practice?
12. How has your teaching practice evolved over time, if at all?
13. How has your teaching practice stayed the same over time, if at all?
14. Some people believe that educators must understand that education is not neutral. What
are your thoughts on this statement?
15. What is the role of reflection in teachers improving their practice?
16. What role does reflection play in your teaching practice, if at all?
a. How often do you reflect?
b. When do you like to reflect?
c. How do you reflect?
17. Tell me about a specific time when you reflected on your teaching.
a. What did you reflect about?
b. How did this reflection shape what you decided to do next?

Now I will ask you questions pertaining to heteronormativity and gender normativity.
18. Now I’m going to share some thoughts that many people have, and I’d like for you to
share your thoughts:
a. Some people might say it is easy to identify someone’s gender through
outward appearances. What are your thoughts on this?
b. Some people may say that your sexual identity is a choice. What are your
thoughts on this?
19. How do schools perpetuate gender marginalization, if at all?
a. In what ways can New Heights improve in this respect, if at all?
20. How do schools perpetuate perpetuating sexuality marginalization, if at all?
143

a. In what ways can New Heights improve in this respect, if at all?
21. How do schools disrupt gender marginalization, if at all?
a. What does New Heights do to disrupt gender marginalization, if anything?
22. How do schools disrupt sexuality marginalization, if at all?
a. What does New Heights do to disrupt sexuality marginalization, if anything?
23. When I say, “cultivating safe and affirming conditions for students”, how would you
define “safe and affirming conditions”?
a. How do you create safe and affirming conditions for students who are
perceived to be or are gender nonconforming/LGBTQ+ students?
b. What barriers get in the way of creating safe and affirming conditions for
gender nonconforming/LGBTQ+ students?
24. Do you feel equipped to teach racially marginalized students who are or perceived to be
LGBTQ+ students?
a. Probe for reasons
b. What supports do you need to feel more equipped to create safe and affirming
conditions for gender nonconforming/LGBTQ+students?

IV. Closing Questions:
25. The goal of this self-study is for me to examine my coaching practice to best support
teachers in creating a critically reflective practice that cultivates safe and affirming
conditions for LGBTQ+ students.
a. What qualities of an educational coach do you find to be helpful to your
teaching practice?
b. In what ways can I best support you during this study as your educational
coach?
c. What do you think will come of the group coaching?
d. Why did you sign up to participate in this study?
i. What are you hoping to get out of it?
26. What are other things you’d like to share with me that I might not have covered, if any?
V. Closing Comments:
Thank you so much for you sharing your thoughts with me today! I really appreciate your time
and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is helpful for my study. If I find
myself with a follow-up question, I am wondering if I might be able to contact you, and if so, if
email is ok? Again, thank you for participating in my study.
144

VI. Post interview summary and reflection
[ADD shortly after each interview]
Final Interview Protocol (post 3-month study)
I. Introduction:
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time that you have
set aside to answer my questions. As I mentioned when we last spoke, the interview should take
about an hour, does that still work for you?
Just to remind you, I want to assure you that I am strictly wearing the hat of a researcher today.
What this means is that the nature of my questions are not evaluative. I will not be making any
judgments on how you are performing as a teacher. This interview is also confidential. What
that means is that your name will not be shared with anyone outside of the research team in
connection to the perspective you provide. I will not share them with other teachers, the
principal, or the district.
The data for this study will be compiled and analyzed for my dissertation and while I do
plan on using some of what you say as direct quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed
to you. I will use a pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and will try my best to de-
identify any of the data I gather from you. I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final
dissertation if you are interested.
As stated in the Study Information Sheet I shared with you, I will keep the data in a
password protected computer and all data will be destroyed after 3 years.
Might you have any questions before we get started? I have brought a recorder with me today
so that I can accurately capture what you share with me. The recording is solely for my purposes
145

to best capture your perspectives and will not be shared with anyone outside the research team.
May I have your permission to record our conversation?
II. Setting the Stage:
Thank you again for participating in the study. I wanted to begin by giving you an
opportunity to share with me a little about your experience.
1. What were some takeaways from your experience participating in the study?
2. What did you learn about yourself, if anything?
3. What did you learn about your teaching practice, if anything?
4. What continued support would be beneficial for you in the future?

III. Heart of the Interview:
Now I’d like to ask you some questions that pertain to your positionality as a teacher.
5. Based on what you learned about positionality, what is your positionality as a teacher?
a. How does your identities influence your positionality?
6. What is the importance of understanding your positionality as a teacher?
a. How does a teachers’ positionality shape their teaching?
7. How has understanding your positionality influenced your teaching practice, if at all?
Now I will ask you questions pertaining to your teaching practice.
8. Since the beginning of the study, how has your teaching practice evolved, if at all?
a. Probe specifically for safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+
9. How has your teaching practice stayed the same, if at all?
a. Probe specifically for safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+
10. What role does critical reflection play in your daily teaching practice, if at all?
a. Tell me about a time when you used critical reflection.
11. How would you describe your critical reflection practice to others?
Now I will ask you questions pertaining to your artifact you brought with you today.
12. What artifact did you bring with you today?
a. Describe why you chose to create this artifact?
b. How does this artifact help you cultivate safe and affirming conditions for
LGBTQ+ students in your classroom?
c. How is this artifact an example of what you learned about queer race pedagogy?
146

13. How do you hope to continue to create safe and affirming conditions for your LGBTQ+
students throughout the rest of this school year and beyond?
Now I’d like to ask you about the coaching experience.
The goal of this self-study is for me to examine my coaching practice in order to best support
teachers
14. How would you describe my coaching practice to other people?
15. What did you learn about your positionality through this coaching, if anything? (Probe
for specific examples)
16. What do you hope you had learned about your positionality that you still wish to learn, if
anything?
17. What specific coaching strategies did I use that supported your reflection on your
positionality, if any? How did it support you, exactly? (Prove for specific coaching
strategies from critical reflection, rational discourse, and queer race pedagogy)
18. What specific coaching strategies did I use that didn’t support your reflection on your
positionality, if any? How did it fall short in supporting, you, exactly?
19. What did you learn about your teaching practice in relation to hetero-and cis-normatvity,
if anything? (Probe for specific examples)
20. What do you hope you had learned about your teaching in regard to creating safe and
affirming conditions that you still wish to learn, if anything?
21. What does it mean to create safe and affirming conditions in your classroom for
LGBTQ+ students? What was the role of the coaching experience in this definition?
22. What does “disrupting hetero- and cisnormativity” mean to you? What was the role of the
coaching experience in this definition?
23. If I was to be invited to do a similar coaching PD for another school, what advice would
you give me for how to approach it? (Probe for specific coaching moves)

IV. Closing Questions:
24. What other insight would you like to share about our conversation today that I might not
have covered, if any?
V. Closing Comments:
Thank you so much for you sharing your thoughts with me today! I really appreciate your time
and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is really helpful for my study. If I
147

find myself with a follow-up question, I am wondering if I might be able to contact you, and if
so, if email is ok? Again, thank you for participating in my study. .
VI. Post interview summary and reflection
[ADD shortly after each interview]

148

Appendix B: Ways of Knowing Questionnaire
Ways of Knowing Questionnaire
1. How would you describe your commitment to social justice in your personal life?
2. How would you describe your commitment to social justice in your professional life?
3. What is your understanding of the word intersectionality?
4. How do you feel about conflict and what’s your comfortability with it?
5. How do you feel about critical feedback from colleagues and others in your life?
6. Self-reflection in a professional setting is a waste of time. (strongly agree, agree,
disagree, strongly disagree)
7. “I have grown the capacity to take responsibility for my own needs, wants, and desires.
(strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
8. “I am concerned with fulfilling society’s expectations.” (strongly agree, agree, disagree,
strongly disagree)
9. “I internalize other people’s assessments of me as my own. I want them to think highly
of me” (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
10. “I orient strongly to concrete suggestions, rules, rewards, and “right” ways of
performance. (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
11. “I orient strongly to others’ opinions, values, and assessments, and think others’ thinking
is best.” (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
12. “I am able to author own values, beliefs, and opinions; and new ideas are assessed in
relation to own bench of judgment.” (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
13. How would you describe your comfort level with teaching LGBTQ+ education in your
classroom?
149

14. What does disrupting cis-heteronormativity in your classroom mean to you?
15. Why did you choose to participate in this coaching program and study?

150

Appendix C: Critical Reflection Protocol
Critical Reflection Protocol
Coach
I will complete 12 critical reflections that will be a more in-depth reflection of my observational
field notes, interview, and teacher journal entries. Ten will be guided by prompts, and two will
be free write reflections. I will answer the following prompts:
1. What information from the initial interviews will help me understand what teachers need
from my coaching practice?
2. Are the teacher’s critical reflection journal entries descriptive, comparative or critical
reflection? What evidence is there of this? How am I teaching them the difference
between different reflection types?
3. What does the data (interview, field notes, and teacher journal entries) tell me about the
teacher’s identity/positionality/disposition? What does it tell me about the teachers’
perceptions of their practices in relation to creating safe and affirming conditions? What
does it tell me about where teachers are based on Drago-Severson and Blum DeStefano
Four Ways of Knowing typology?
4. What challenges are coming up for me during this study? How are they impacting my
ability to coach?
5. How does my identities influence my positionality as a coach? What internal beliefs
about myself and others do I need to examine and interrogate?
6. What barriers (internal, external) get in the way of my coaching practice? What evidence
is there of this?
7. How does my coaching help teachers foster equity or position them differently to
fostering equity in the classroom?
8. How does my coaching help teachers in disrupting heteronormativity and cisnormativity?
Am I enabling their ability to disrupt heteronormative and cisnormativite practices?
9. Looking at the teacher artifact, what does it tell me about the teacher’s understanding of
how to create safe and affirming conditions in their classroom? What does it tell me
about the ways the teacher still has room to grow with respect to creating safe and
affirming conditions?
10. What have I learned about myself and my coaching practice from this 3-month study?

151

Teacher
I will collect 6 critical reflections from teacher participants. They will answer the following
prompts:
1. Write about your teaching practice; where you are in terms of creating safe and affirming
conditions for your students and how you disrupt cis-heteronormativity, if at all, in your
classroom. Explore the ideas of power dynamics and hegemony.
2. How is your reality similar and different from the realities of your students? Explore
deeply the ideas of identity, positionality, and assumptions, etc. in relation to race,
gender, and sexuality.
3. What is a class practice that cultivates safety and affirming conditions in your classroom?
Who, specifically, does this practice support? Who might it leave out? What class
practice do you want to add this school year that will help cultivate safe and affirming
conditions? What do you need to be able to do this?
4. How do you feel about talking with your students about gender, and sexuality? Explore
any fears or other emotional barriers that may come up for you.
5. How would you create and/or how do you create safe and affirming conditions for your
students? Reflect on your own identity, positionality, and disposition, along with any
fear that may arise in relation to creating safe and affirming conditions for students.
6. What have you learned about yourself and your teaching practice throughout the three-
month program? What role does fear now play in disrupting cis-heteronormativity, if at
all?

152

Appendix D: Code Book
RQ: How do I coach teachers to reflect on their positionalities and teaching practices and to
work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity by producing safe and affirming conditions for racially
marginalized LGBTQ+ students in their classroom?
Codes Description Quantity Quote Example
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: School Policy
Teacher refers to school
policies as cisheternormative
2 “I’m not actually sure what policies New
Heights has around protecting our gender-
nonconforming students, but the most
common school rules I know of that
allegedly ‘support’ and ‘protect’
LGBTQ+ students are punitive anti-
bullying policies, which really reflects the
transphobia and homophobia that are so
rooted in schools. Rather than give kids
the space to learn and talk and think about
different gender identities and sexualities,
schools choose to maintain these silent
systems of oppression and punish kids for
bullying — when frankly schools
themselves are bullies! And we all know
that punishment does not make for
effective education (and draws some bold
parallels between schools and prisons).”
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Students
Coming Out
Teacher refers to how
cisheternormativity impacts
students coming out
1 “I am thinking of students who came out
to me and how I don’t think I did enough
for them to feel comfortable being 100%
themselves around the other students.”
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Curriculum
Teacher refers to
cisheternormativity showing
up in curriculum and teaching
resources
3 “Doing a math problem, like if we if we
were using Eureka, a lot of like word
problems from the curriculum reinforce
gender norms, like girls playing with
dolls and boys playing”
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Harm and
Violence
Teacher refers to
cisheteronormative harm and
violence on students and staff
9 “Like there is a lot of harassment and
bullying against boys who aren't
masculine enough or don't fit that gender
norms.”
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Advocating
Teacher refers to a systematic
change that needs to occur in
schools
2 “I think of like black trans women who
are at the intersections of like every
marginalized identity and I think there
should be space for a change in schools,
especially for kids who already are
racially marginalized. Schools are already
such oppressive places. Like one
concrete thing schools can do is talk
about gender.”
153

Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Gender
Stereotypes/Splitting
Teacher refers to how schools
perpetuate gender norms,
stereotypes, and split or groups
students by the gender binary
8 “Uniforms are a thing, and we make
uniforms that have skirts and like we
don't open up the idea to having boys
wear skirts, enforcing gender stereotypes
through clothing”
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Inequity
Teacher refers to inequity in
discipline between genders
1 “For boys, they get in way more trouble
for stuff than the girls do and they kind of
will do the same types of behaviors. So
I'll see boys are the ones that get kicked
out of the classes, they are the ones who
get disciplined the most”
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Social Pressure
Teacher refers to social
pressures to conform to
heteronormative identities
2 “Sometimes it may be the pressures of the
world that makes people feel like they
have to look and appear a certain way; or
hide who they are.”
Cis-Heternormativity in
School: Stereotypes
Teacher refers to stereotypes
regarding gender and sexuality
representation in schools
4 “I've heard coaches, you know, say stuff
like, oh, you run like a girl.”
Teacher Barrier:
Cultural and Religious
Beliefs
Teacher refers to as religious
or cultural beliefs of
stakeholders as a barrier to
creating safe and affirming
conditions
1 “One thing that gets in the way of
creating safe and affirming conditions is
cultural beliefs, personal beliefs personal
opinions, and religious beliefs. Also, as
well, a lack of exposure to other people or
not having a network of different or
diverse populations of people to interact
with.”
Teacher Barrier: Culture
of Fear
The culture of fear that
resonates within communities
is a barrier to disrupting
heteronormativity
3 “I guess the barrier is really this the
culture of fear.”

Teacher Barrier:
Distanced Learning
Distanced learning due to
Covid-19 has teachers directly
in student’s homes causing
various barriers to disrupting
heteronormativity
13 “In the present moment what has been
stopping me is that we are all in our
homes. We have not come together in
person to create a safe communal space.
We can set norms over zoom, but we are
still being heard by others in families’
kitchens and living rooms. I’m finding
that students that were outspoken in
person, are less so over zoom. Is this
because they know that more people than
are logged into zoom can hear them? I
just thought about this. This is what has
ultimately stopped me from approaching
these discussions. Also, thinking about
12-14 year olds, a lot of times they feel
more comfortable engaging in a range of
conversations away from their parents.
Physical classrooms, for many students,
were a place for them to feel free to make
mistakes, to explore new ideas in a safe
environment, and to challenge ideas.
Many times, the home environment has a
much more top-down hierarchy of power,
and the classroom that I attempt to
cultivate is much more shared power
dynamics where every idea can be
154

validated and respectfully explored and
challenged.”
Teacher Barrier: Lack
of Support from Admin
Teacher refers to the lack of
support from the school
administration, policies, and
structure.
14 “I think fully taking a stance as a school
like we're a school that normalizes not
assuming a person’s pronouns, that we
are going to have gender neutral
restrooms, that we're going to have safe
spaces at school. We're going to center
our students. We're going to do this work
starting from TK through 8
th
grade. Every
teacher is going to prioritize this work
and that as a school we take a stance with
our families to be like if you are
struggling with this let's help. Let's talk.
Let's have a conversation about not
tolerating homophobia. I just need our
school to take a stance.”
Teacher Barrier: Not
equipped to teach
Gender and Sexuality
Teacher refers to themselves
not being equipped to teach
Gender and Sexuality
10 “Honestly, I don’t feel equipped to have
real in-depth conversations with my
students about gender and sexuality. I
generally keep it generic and talk about
acceptance of others despite any
differences. I recognize that I am
privileged in the sense that my sexuality
aligns with society’s views, and my
gender, although deemed to be less
valuable than a cis White male, also
aligns with society’s norm. In addition, I
recognize that I am doing my students a
disservice by not delving into identity as
it relates to gender and sexuality, and
hope to become more informed, so that I
can take an active and inclusive approach
to exploring topics of identity. I feel like
because of the many privileges that I
have, I have been allowed to avoid
dealing with issues that didn’t directly
affect me.”
Teacher Barrier: Other
Staff Members’
Resistance
How other staff members
create barriers to gender and
sexuality education with
students due to their own
resistance
1 “Other staff can be a barrier, like those
who are really resistant to learning. For
example, I would come out from lunch
and see them lined up in girl and boy
lines and I really took us like five steps
back.”
Teacher Barrier:
Resources
Teachers refer to lack of
resources to help them teach or
create lessons that support
LGBTQ+ Education
4 “I think teaching gender and sexuality
needs to be really explicit and I think
teachers are doing a great job of going out
on their own and building lessons and
finding resources and finding books. But
it's got to be built into the framework and
curriculum. We need to be provided
resources to help us do this work.”
Teacher Barrier: School
Policies
Teacher perspective of school
policies in regards to safety,
consequences, and
accountability
8 “So I feel like the school doesn't have its
own plan for what to do about making
sure it's a safe place. It does not feel like a
safe place for the kids. It really does not
155

even feel safe for me. So, you know, just
doesn't feel like there's accountability for
people's behaviors or actions or
anything.”
Teacher Barrier:
Vulnerability/Being
Queer
Teacher’s experience being
queer and vulnerable in a
school setting
6 “I definitely feel anxious and vulnerable!
I think that being queer and nonbinary
and pretty deep in the language both puts
me at ease because I am able to trust how
I’ll frame and respond to things and also
fills me with fear that I will be outed! It
definitely hurts and sucks to feel like I
have to zip up my queerness to exist in
this institution, and I also recognize that
all of this is a result of the structures that
I’m working within. When I’m actually
doing this work with kids, I always feel
really hopeful and expansive and
generally trusting (not that I really share
anything about my gender/sexuality with
them). I’d like to dig more into my
confidence that this work is vital and I
don’t care if colleagues or family
members are uncomfortable with it!
LGBTQ+ youth are constantly in crisis!”
Teacher Barrier: Parent
Pushback
Teachers experience or
perception of parent pushback
4 “So I feel like I want to tell the truth and
disrupt, but at the same time, it feels like
it still needs to be discussed as a school.
What is challenging is parent influence,
because you have so many parents who
come in from like a religious background
cultural beliefs.”
Teacher Barrier: State
Standards
Teacher experience and
reference to state standards
creating challenges in teaching
and integrating gender and
sexuality education
7 “In the beginning, I didn't care about
standards. I was doing projects and
everything I can do to really expand their
knowledge of the world. And then I feel
like standards came down really hard on
me and I lost my inspiration and I kind of
felt like I was falling into the system, like
the system was changing me.”
Teacher Positionality:
Identity: Class
Teacher refers to their class
privilege, power, or oppression
and impacts/positionality on
teaching
2 “Coming from a privileged background
and having grown up middle and upper
middle class and going to like Santa
Monica schools and public schools. And
yeah, definitely aware of, like, what my
experiences were and like how it's very
different from our students.”
Teacher Positionality:
Identity: Gender/
Sexuality
Teacher refers to their gender
or sexuality and how it
impacts or relates to their
positionality as a teacher
19 “I didn't have an adult or like someone to
help me develop a critical mindset or like
the fact that it took forever for me to
realize I'm Queer but you know like if
teachers had normalized that my world
would have made so much more sense.”

Teacher Positionality:
Identity: Race/Ethnicity
Teacher refers to how race or
ethnicity impact their
positionality as a teacher
27 “Being Black plays a major role in how I
teach. When I think about how I'm seen
through our society or people’s
156

perceptions of Black people, then I think
about the students that I work with and
think about some of the ways that they
may be perceived through our society.”
Teacher Positionality:
Identity: Gender/
Sexuality: Coming Out
Teachers feelings and
perceptions about coming out
in a school setting
3 Quote 1: “Being in this group was
actually my first time coming out as
nonbinary to work friends! It felt nice and
affirming, and my fears of being rejected
for having an illegible gender at work
were unfounded, at least in this very chill
and safe group”

Quote 2: “I think being bisexual is a
different way to come out because first of
all, has the word sexual in it. So I tried to
just use the word or like explain what it is
and I have a formulated way of saying it,
but It almost because of the wording of it
or like the nature of the sexuality it leads
to adults like to sexualize it so it's like it
was very scary to come out of that in the
classroom.”
Teacher Positionality:
Pedagogy
Teacher’s understand and use
of pedagogy in the classroom
4 “When it comes down to like pedagogy,
the first book that we had to read was
pedagogy of the oppressed, of course.

I think one of the chapters really hit me
because I feel like a lot of us go into it not
really knowing that we're going into it but
we go into what the Savior mindset. And
so, like, once I read pedagogy of the
oppressed, I kind of like check me right
away just being like, oh no, I'm not the
only one here to help you. Because there
was that one chapter about like how
liberation needs to come from them like
liberation needs to come from the people
it doesn't come from the teacher, and so
that was really one thing that stood out to
me.”
Teacher Positionality:
Teacher Description
Teacher’s understanding, and
description of what
positionality is in reference to
teaching.
8 “I think of positionality like the
composition of your identities and like
how power and privilege dynamic fit in
within it. I think it's one of the most
important pieces to like be constantly
reflecting on while teaching and like
growing as a teacher. I think it's
something to always come back. To and
think about.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Hopelessness
Teacher’s feelings of
hopelessness regarding school
and schooling.
1 “Part of me feels very like sad about the
system of schooling and that it will never
change and part of me feels like I don't
know like I still think there's so much
potential in education and that like
education is the key to major change in
this country and like in the world.”
157

Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Defeat
Teacher refers to feelings of
defeat when it comes to doing
this work.
1 “If it doesn't start early enough it is so
much harder to teach the kids these things
and takes years of unlearning. I think
that's like when I know like it has to be
fully integrated everywhere. So
sometimes it just feels defeating.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear: virtual
learning/being in homes
Teacher refers to perceptions
of and positionality on
teaching in student’s homes,
and the fear that comes up.
6 Quote 1: “ I don't know what to do
sometimes because the fear of being in
their homes has amplified how hard it is
to be a Queer teacher way more for me
this year.”

Quote 2: “ My current fear in doing this
work is that I am a guest in 25 homes. I
am a guest in 25 different homes with
different beliefs, with different structures
and it doesn’t feel like a space that has
been co-constructed with students. It
doesn’t feel like a safe space and I’ve
been struggling with that.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear:
Comfort doing this work
Teacher refers to positionality
and fear around comfort
teaching about gender and
sexuality
8 “I’m not comfortable really and I was
trying to understand why, why don't I feel
comfortable? I don't. First of all, like my
parents never talked to me about sex,
gender, sexuality, to this day, they'll
pretend like sex doesn't exist because
that's how you know conservative, they
are.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear: Coming
Out
Teacher refers to feelings of
fear to come out as a
queer/trans teacher.
3 “I don't know. I mean, I feel very scared
to come out into an elementary school
space. When I talk to myself in my head
about it, I'm like, there's no way they
could get mad at me for this because, you
know, but it's still it's marginalization, in
the sense that you may not feel as
comfortable to talk about your partner as
straight teachers do.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear: Don’t
want to lose job
Teacher refers to fear about
losing job if they do work
around disrupting
heteronormativity
3 “I mean, I have done it but you get scared
like you just get scared because like it's
my first year at this school. And I don't
want to lose my job.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear:
Internalized
Trans/Homophobia
Teacher refers fear about their
own internalized
trans/homophobia and how it
shows or has shown up in their
work as a teacher.
8 “I learned that I have more fear and
internalized homophobia and transphobia
than I'd realized! I appreciated the work
that we got to do around identifying our
fears and grounding ourselves in our
values around justice work and truth-
telling (thinking about that Audre Lorde
quote!). Fear can be really consuming and
a huge block, so I want to keep
processing all of my own internalized
junk so that I can better support a safe and
affirming space for gender expansive
kids.”
158

Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear:
Macrosystems
Teacher refers to
macrosystem/outside influence
or pressure towards social
heteronormative conditioning
that may cause fear.
2 “And I Just thought. I think there's also a
lot of fear about like pronouns and like
things being different, and I just want
everyone to know, it's okay people. It's
doesn't like take anything from you. It's
okay.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear: Mistake
Teacher refers to fears about
making a mistake or
saying/doing the wrong thing
when teaching gender and
sexuality.
8 “I do fear, like if I say something, not
saying the right thing, I guess, or like, not
knowing the right language to use So I
guess language. I think that's the main
thing that I need is like what kind of
language is the best to make sure that
people in my classroom feel cared about.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear:
Pushback from Parents
Teachers refer to their
positionality around doing this
work due to their fear of
pushback from parents
6 “I think one of the reasons I haven’t
addressed issues around
heteronormativity in the classroom is
because I’m afraid of pushback from
parents. I don’t know how much support
there will be from them or from school
leadership, and I just avoid these issues.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear: Lose
Relationship w/Parents
Teacher refers to fear around
losing relationships with
parents when disrupting
heteronormativity in the
classroom due to parent
pushback.
2 “When we talked about the relationships
that that really resonates with me as well.
Just those ties that we have with our
parents. They have a lot of positive
feelings for us, right, and we definitely,
we love that about our families, it would
hurt to lose that relationship.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear: Somatic
Response
Teacher refers to how fear
shows up in their physical
body, and how that impacts
their ability to teach LGBTQ+
content.
3 “I actually didn't think about this while I
was writing, but whenever I am teaching
a lesson that I'm really passionate about
gender or sexuality. I feel my anxiety in
my body like I'm hyper cognizant of what
I'm saying. And I'm hyper cognizant of
what the students are saying and it's so
weird because the conversation in my
head is like this is not a big deal. But I
know it is a big deal because if it wasn't
then why am I like so aware and anxious
in this time. So I think that's a way that
the fear impacts me.”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear:
Pandemic Influence
Teacher refers to the fear of
doing disruption work during a
pandemic, reference the chaos
of teaching during this time.
1 “I guess my teaching practice feels all
over the place because I am all over the
place! During this pandemic, it's so easy
to get lost in the chaos and demands of
teaching and I have to make disruption
work smaller so that it fits in around all
the crap we're expected to do. But
disruption has to have its own place, it
can't just get squeezed in!”
Teacher Positionality:
Emotions: Fear:
Imposter Syndrome
Teacher refers to not knowing
enough/aren’t qualified to do
this work
6 “I question if I am the best teacher for
these kids. I don't even know if I'm a
good teacher, you know, and as like a
baby teacher I'm just like, I don't know
what I'm doing. And I probably suck.
And I'm really shitty so I fall into like
heavy imposter syndrome.”
159

Teacher Positionality:
Origin of Fear
Teacher refers and reflect on
the origin of their fear
6 Quote 1: “I am not sure, but I think one
source of fear is coming from a rigid
family structure and culture in which no
one is openly anything other than
straight.”

Quote 2: “I notice most of my fearful
feelings come from situations where I’m
unaware of the consequence. I don’t fear
things that are “scary” like in the movies
because I mostly know that these are
fictional accounts.”

Quote 3: “The fear is for sure rooted in
heteronormativity and maybe even some
trauma. I was always a person who either
uses people pleasing or avoidance to see
if I could bypass any conflict because of
past traumas. The main place is my chest
but I also do carry the tension in my
shoulders and back.”
Teacher Positionality:
Reflection on/Impact of
Fear
Teacher refers to reflections of
how fear impacts their work
and their body.
10 “Fear is something I feel in my body
whether an increased heartbeat or
shortness of breath and something feeling
unsteady. I am someone who definitely
lets fear win. I will avoid a task if it
includes fear for me or make excuses as
to why I shouldn’t do the task.”
Techer Positionality:
Race and
Heteronormativity
Teacher reflects on their
positionality and privilege in
regards to race and
heternormativity
2 “Because I, kind of, you know, conform
to societies view of identifying as
heterosexual and female that I've just kind
of been privileged where I could avoid
dealing with issues that others would
have to face and so when I kind of think
about like how passionate I am about race
and equality because I'm impacted. But
where's that same passion and whatnot for
LGBTQ+ people and issues? Even
though I'm not impacted in that same
sense, I just was just thinking about the
privileges that I have and how I can, you
know, choose to learn more, or choose
not to, you know, and not be impacted in
any way in that respect.”

Teacher Positionality:
Disposition: Attitude
Teacher refers to their attitude
and ideas around teaching.
6 “I think that teachers have to understand
like who the kids are and be open to like
their different identities that they come in
with. So I think that's a big thing. Um,
and then I think it's important that
teachers aren't like overly strict to the
point where like kids feel that they can't
be themselves. So I think that has
something to do with it. Um, I think their
identities and their identities in their
160

families and in their communities like
bringing that in is important.”
Teacher Positionality:
Disposition: Beliefs
Teacher refer to their beliefs
about teaching and disrupting
heteronormativity
8 “I know that people would say to leave
my own beliefs out of teaching or leave
my own politics out of teaching, but I
mean, I think it was powerful. That said,
like teaching is inherently political right
so like you can teach. You can whatever
way you teach, you're doing something
political because if you're just teaching
into the mainstream then you're
upholding an oppressive structure. But if
you decide to teach outside of that
mainstream than you are being politically
rebellious against that oppressive
system.”
Teacher Positionality:
Disposition: Mindset
Teacher refers to their mindset
around teaching and how a
teacher’s mindset impacts
students.
8 I think that if I had gone in to teaching
with the deficit mindset that I'm going in
to help kids, I think I would just do so
much more damage. I think teachers who
go out and teach kids that they don't
understand and they don't take the time to
understand are damaging.
Teacher Positionality:
Disposition: Values
Teacher refers to their values
around teaching.
5 “School should be a place of joy. It
should be a place of comforts. And like, if
we can get kids to discover something
that they really like and like push them to
do what they are interested in, helping
them find what they like to do. That’s
what I value.”

Teaching Practice:
Counter Narratives
Teacher refers to how or why
they use counter narratives as
a teaching practice
3 “I strongly take into consideration the fact
that my kids are not white, and they're not
living the mainstream culture. I'm trying
to teach them a lot about counter
narratives in history. Like I feel like that's
really important. And so I keep that in
mind when I teach them.”
Teaching Practice:
Critical Reflection
Teacher refers to the role
reflection plays in teaching
21 “If you just teach a lesson and don't think
about it again. It's like there's no growth
and I feel like critical reflection is like the
root of growth for a teacher.”
Teaching Practice:
Curriculum and
Instruction
Teacher refers to their
teaching practices, or
reference teaching practices
that are effective
11 “I try to create lessons and activities that
allow students to share their thoughts,
ideas, families, and culture. I also
introduce students to people, places, and
cultures that may differ from their own,
and share with them parts of myself with
the hope of exploring identities, making
connections, and building relationships in
order to cultivate a safe and affirming
community.”
Teaching Practice:
Disruption
Teacher refer to disruption and
how to disrupt
heteronormativity in school
20 “The liberation of Black and Brown lives
in America, the liberation of LGBTQ+
lives, the liberation of immigrants- these
161

are all critically connected. Kids
especially must be liberated. When we
nurture happy and free-thinking children,
I believe that we are disrupting dominate
culture, and shaping a happier and freer
future for everyone.”
Teaching Practice:
Flexibility
Teacher reflects on the
importance of being flexible to
meet student needs
1 “I realized I had come to the realization
that I may have plans for Monday,
Tuesday and Wednesday. But if
something happens with the students or
within current events, then those plans
don't need to happen because whatever
the kids need that day, that’s what I want
to do.”

Teaching Practice:
Healing Space
Teacher refers to using art and
connection to create healing
time for students
1 “I guess when I think about how I
respond to this overwhelm with actions in
my teaching practice, I've been
prioritizing making students feel loved
and connected, and I've been trying to
incorporate a lot of dancing and some
visual art time every day. We've been
painting at the end of every day, and I'll
offer to stay on Zoom for 15-30 minutes
after class officially ends, and there are
usually at least 6 kids who want to stay on
to do art together. It has reminded me that
before I decided to teach I wanted to
practice art therapy! I'm grateful to be
doing it finally, particularly in a time
where we need extra healing time every
day.”
Teaching Practice:
Identity Work
Teacher refers to identity work
they do in the classroom
5 “Create units where students are able to
explore their identities. Where students
can see themselves and their worlds
reflected. Center identity work in our
literacy practices.”
Teaching Practice:
Representation
Teacher refers to the
importance of representation
in instruction
2 “I want to focus on making intentional
choices to learn about like people who
they could identify with, because it's like

I’m queer, and I think often about how I
didn't learn about a single queer person or
trans person until I got to college.”
Teaching Practice:
Restorative and
Accountability
Teacher refers to restorative
practices
1 “I tried to normalize and teach my
students to confronting problems with the
community members instead of using
punitive response”
Teaching Practice: Safe
and Affirming
Conditions
Teacher describe how they’ve
created or what safe and
affirming conditions are
45 “In my own classroom I do feel like we
have a like A safe classroom. I think we
share a lot with each other. I feel like we
play with each other a lot. I feel like
we've been there for each other. We’ve
created this community over the last year
where it feels like anyone could reveal
something big about themselves.”
162

Teaching Practice: Safe
and Affirming
Resources
Teacher refers to resources
that cultivate safe and
affirming conditions
1 “I tried to add like gender neutral toys
like things available in the classroom.”
Teaching Practice:
Student Criticality
Teacher refers to teaching
criticality to students
4 I know that's like one thing I really like
try to push on my kids is to critically
think, like, why is it such a big deal? Why
are people so mad and to them It's just
super simple.
Teaching Practice:
Language
Teachers refer to normalizing
gender inclusive language
9 “So of course I try to normalize
Language. I tried to read different books
so that we can normalize differences and I
try to honor identities and the names the
children want to go by.”
Teacher Support
Needed: Resources
Teacher refers to resources
that would support them in
disrupting heteronormativity
6 “I think providing a few more short texts
by LGBTQ+ activists/thinkers/writers for
students to read and discuss might be
helpful.”
Teacher Support
Needed: Learning
Experience/Coaching
Teacher’s refer to extra
support they need through
learning experiences or future
coaching
12 “I feel like I'd love a crash course or
something LGBTQ+ history, and
examples of actual activities that I could
do with students”
Teacher Supports
Needed: Navigating
Fear
Teacher needs for support in
navigating fear
8 “I really want to think about tools that can
really help me navigate my fear. I think
the fear will always live within me.

But it's like I don't want this fear to
prevent me from doing work that I care
about, so having a healthy way to view
things I say to myself, or things that I
reflect on will be important.”
My Coaching Practice:
Description
Teacher reflections on
coaching experience
12 Quote 1: “Mary provides resources, time
and space for you to reflect on your
teaching practices. She helps you reflect
on the barriers and challenges you face
and guides you in planning small
actionable steps that you can take back to
your teaching right away.”

Quote 2: “Very warm, thoughtful and
supportive. You created a safe space for
everyone to be comfortable enough to
really explore a topic that many people
shy away from or are intimidated by.”

Quote 3: “As a coach you provided a safe
community that allowed everyone to
speak openly and honestly. You shared
information with us, encouraged us to
share resources, and provided multiple
opportunities for self-reflection.”
Coaching Positionality:
Identity
Coach refers to own identity
(race, gender, sexuality) how it
has positioned her work in
schools
10 “I’ll start off and share a little bit more
about why I've decided to do this for my
dissertation and then we can just popcorn
around. My name is Mary, I use she/her
pronouns and when I came into my
163

doctorate program, I really wanted to
focus my dissertation on something that
will just help me with the future of my
career, whatever that looks like I have no
idea. I still don't have any idea of what's
next for me, but I know that I wanted to
use my dissertation process as a way to
help me figure out what I'm passionate
about and what I want to do next career
wise and I was able to join a group that
was focusing on disrupting different
entrenched inequities that happen within
our workplace. From there it was
deciding which inequity I wanted to focus
on and with my own experience
personally and professionally, specifically
as a Black biracial, queer woman. I really
wanted to investigate the intersections of
race, gender, and sexuality, specifically
what it looks like in schools, since that's
where I’ve been working. I wanted it to
use this as an opportunity to really reflect
critically on how schooling impacted my
own personal life and my own trajectory
and really start to interrogate reasons of
why I wasn't out when I was counseling
or teaching. What were the reasons
behind that and really focus on how to
create safer and more affirming spaces for
young people, but specifically black and
brown communities where homophobia
and transphobia is just so prevalent based
on religion and culture histories. And of
course, new heights is the perfect space
for that. And so to be able to continue to
really explore and sort of pilot this
program at New heights is also just a
blessing because that's, that's all I know,
basically, as far as professionally working
at a school as a lot of you know. And so
to be able to do that before I figure out
what's next for me is also great. I talked
to one of you a little bit about this in my
interview, I also really believe in the
liberation for all people, and specifically
black and indigenous folks. And to me,
that means all people. And so it's like not
just focusing on cis hetero able bodied
folx but like really focusing on the
liberation of all marginalized
communities and there is just so much.
There's just so much potential with
working with kids because, as you all
may know like they just soak up this stuff
when they're learning about it. And so to
me it's, how can we disrupt the spaces in
164

order to really support our children in
helping create more equitable spaces for
them. So that's why I'm doing this
dissertation.”

Coaching Positionality:
Disposition
Coach refers to their
disposition (attitude, belief,
mindset) around coaching and
working with teachers
16 “I believe that it is imperative that
teachers receive not only support in how
to teach LGBTQ+ education, or how to
cultivate safe and affirming spaces, but
really interrogate what barriers or
challenges get in the way of them doing
this work. We hold so much trauma
regarding race, gender and sexuality in
our bodies, and fear has shown to be a
prevalent indicator in one’s capacity to
agitate and disrupt heteronormativity in
schools.”
Coaching Positionality:
Emotion: Fear
Coach refers to their
positionality around fear and
how it impacts their coaching
work with teachers
11 “I’ve come to understand that I hold a lot
of fear around doing this work with
people who may be resistant. What I’ve
learned from working with a group of
teachers who are interested and ready to
disrupt heteronormativity, is that we have
a lot in common when it comes to the fear
of doing this work. I’ve learned through
this process that the fear I face is a trauma
response to the internalized oppression I
was conditioned to experience throughout
my life. Understanding that my body is
literally going through a traumatic
response when I think about confronting
this work with people who may be
resistant, has helped a lot”
Coaching Practice:
Learning in Community
Coach’s practice and ability to
create a safe learning
experience within a group
10 “I appreciated how you started each
session by honoring the legacies of the
activists who fought for the liberation of
the LGBTQ+ community. It helped to
center us on the work at hand, so that we
can continue the fight. You also created a
safe space for us to have courageous
conversations, and recognized that
courage can look differently for each of
us. In addition, the meditative check-ins
were welcomed, because sometimes we
are so caught up in the hustle and bustle
of life that we forget to check-in with
ourselves and count our victories. Finally,
you posed questions that made us think
critically, discuss collectively, and begin
the process of disrupting
heteronormativity with our newfound
knowledge and community support.”
Coaching Practice:
Checking for
Understanding
Coach’s ability to check for
understanding from group
members
2 “Before we move on, are there any
questions, comments, or reflections about
what was just discussed?”
165

Coaching Practice:
Demeanor
Coach’s demeanor and impact
of that on group
4 “I appreciated your demeanor. I
appreciated the format and consistency of
your groups. I looked forward to the
groups a lot!”
Coaching Practice:
Language
Coach reflection on language 3 “I realize that I often minimize my own
experience when teaching transparently,
as if it isn’t as important as someone
else’s experience. Often times, when
doing this, a participant will validate my
experience, letting me know it’s
importance. I never paid attention to this
before, and really learned the value of
using affirmative language when giving
examples from my own life as learning
tools.”
Coaching Practice:
Visioning
Coach uses visioning
techniques to support teachers
in creating safe and affirming
conditions
8 Quote 1: “Today we are going to look at
how we can use visioning as a strategy to
reflect not only on our practice but start to
see how we would like to shift things that
we do in the classroom and school
community.”

Quote 2: “We can either choose fear
choose to do this work and so hopefully
that vision can help us to choose to do
this work.”
Coaching Practice:
Critical Reflection
Teaching
How was critical reflection
explicitly taught to participants
5 We’re going to take a look at three
different types of reflections to help us to
better understand what critical reflection
is and the way that we're going to use it as
a tool during this coaching program. First
is descriptive reflection. And so I think
that is the foundation on how we start to
learn about reflection is describing what
is happening.

So, when looking at what is happening, is
this working, and who is it working for.
How do we know. What do I not
understand. Those would go under
describing the matter of the reflection and
then the next level of reflection would
then be a comparative reflection. So
looking at the matter of what you're
reflecting on in comparison to alternative
views or other people's perspectives. So
you're comparing it to something or
someone else. So questions you might ask
are what are alternative views of what's
happening. How do people who are
directly or indirectly involved describe
and explain what's happening. What does
research contribute to what is happening,
how can I improve what's not working. If
there is a goal, what are some other ways
of accomplishing it. How do other people
166

accomplish this goal. So it's that
competitive nature and then critical
reflection takes it another level of having
considered the implications of what is
happening. In order to establish a
renewed perspective. So the goal of
critical reflection is transformative with
the idea of shifting a perspective in a way
that supports growth and so it's taking it
to the next level of being able to look at
what are the implications for other people
so not just looking at other people's
perspectives, but where are the
implications of those perspectives. What
are the implications of your perspectives.
How can I examine assumptions and
biases, interrogate feelings that are
coming up, like you might be in a
situation and like you get angry or you
get frustrated with a person. And so it's
like interrogating. Where did that come
from, like, did a bias or an assumption
come up that I need to think through.”
Coaching Practice:
Cultivating JOY!
Focusing on the power of
cultivating joy within the
coaching program and within
the participants classrooms.
5 Quote 1: “We are going to end this
program with some queer joy. When we
focus a lot on learning about marginalized
groups and the work of disrupting
oppressive systems. However, groups of
people who experience oppression and
marginalization still thrive, still find joy,
and are happy with who they are. We are
going to end with joy by watching a clip
from Pose. Pose is a tv series on FX with
highlights the ballroom community of
queer and trans people in New York
around the late 1980s/early 1990s. This
scene highlights the joy of Blance feeling
better after feeling really ill from Aids.
The joy in this ballroom scene is what I
want to leave you all with.”

Quote 2: “So my win was just like a
loosening up and playing more games and
just giving my students literally social
time like literally opening breakout rooms
and having them just talk to their friends
and they come back to class laughing, and
I'm like I haven't heard this kid laugh
since maybe in like a year I haven't heard
this kid laugh, so the fact that she came
back to class laughing was amazing.”
Coaching Practice:
Feedback
Ways in which coach provides
feedback and responses to
participant inquiry; also
teachers reflections on coach
feedback
15 “I think what that reminds me of is how
truth telling could be as small as like
deciding in a moment, like if you are
going to answer a question truthfully, as
informal as it may be, and it could be a
167

bigger deal to you, then the person who's
asking the question. And how often that
may show up in in our classrooms with
like students who are just like curious or
conversations come up and we have to
make like split decisions of like are we
having an honest conversation right now,
or not.”

Coaching Practice:
Grounding the work
3 “I want you to think of a person. It can be
an ancestor, someone living, an elder, or a
family member or friend, or someone you
don't know that you follow or are inspired
by that you want to call in today to help
ground you in this work as we really
begin to focus on how we want to disrupt
and what we would like to focus on in the
Spring. So that's going to be our check in
today. I’ll start and model. I’m bringing
in the spirit of Assata Shakur who is
living her life in Cuba right now. I’m
currently reading her autobiography and
am so inspired by her story, her journey,
her kind, loving, honest nature, and the
strength and hope she embodied that led
to her escape. She is a symbol of
liberation and I bring her into this space
today.”
Coaching Practice:
instruction
Coach’s ability to provide
instructs to tasks and activities
7 “Alright, so as you can see on the slides. I
have a spot for each of you to think
through a one to three sentence mission
statement and a one to three sentence
vision statement. I'm going to give you
some time to think through that. About
nine minutes so we can finish up on time.
And then the next time we meet, we'll
pick back up and share. We'll start with
sharing those mission and visions. Um, so
yeah, I'm going to give you until about
4:30 pm and then we'll come back
together. We will share next week. Any
questions?”
Coaching Practice:
Making tasks explicit
Teacher reflections on tasks
explicit coaching strategies,
and coach’s use of this
practice
9 “I think I appreciate a coach that sets
really explicit goals for our meetings like
by the end of this meeting this is what we
are going to accomplish and then we
work together to accomplish that goal,
and that there is a tangible thing that has
been produced. That is really helpful for
me.”
Coaching Practice:
Modeling
How coach models activities
and shares
6 “I'll start and model today’s check in, and
then we'll popcorn around, so I'm feeling
a mix of excitement and also anxiety
because this is a moment where
something's coming from my head and
heart and out into reality which is wild
168

because I've been working on this project
for awhile. So, I usually feel anxiety in
my stomach. So that's where I feel it right
now.”
Coaching Practice:
Setting the Tone
Setting the tone to craft a safe
and brave space
4 “I want this also to be a space where you
all can really just be open and honest with
each other, and also be a space where you
start to connect your feelings to your
body and really associate that with how
we show up in this world. Because I think
that's very important. So to be mindful of
that. And so just be aware of where each
other is, is always important. And so I do
appreciate you all for checking in.”

Coaching Practice:
Routines
Routines that happened each
session and the purpose of
these routine in creating safe
and brave spaces
9 Quote 1: “ I thought the strategy of
bringing in and honoring BIPOC helped
me reflect on my positionality.
Specifically, reflections where we looked
at quotes helped me think critically and
reflect on my positionality.”

Quote 2: “The community norms that we
went over before each session were
helpful in thinking about what safety and
inclusivity means in the classroom. I also
reflected a lot about what this means
during session 5, when we thought about
our vision and mission statements for our
school community.”

Quote 3: “I want to start off each session
by acknowledging the reasons behind
what I'm doing and why I feel this work
is so important. Let’s start by honoring
the legacy of trans, queer, gender non-
conforming Black, Indigenous and people
of color who have fought and continue to
fight for freedom and liberation for all
people and a lot of my work for this
coaching program will be grounded in
their legacy. We honor their work in
hopes that we can continue their legacy
through our work. So next we will do a
meditative check in. I want you all to take
a deep breath in and take a moment to
think about how you're feeling right now
there's a feelings wheel here if you need
some support in naming how you're
feeling, but we're just going to check in
and say how we're doing, how we're
feeling, and where you feel it in your
body. I’ll go first.”

169

Coaching Practice:
Transparent Teaching
Using my experiences and
stories to help explicitly teach
a concept
7 “That’s something I've had to pay close
attention to lately because fear will
paralyze me to the point where I can't do
work in the way that I want to. So I have
to really think about where is it showing
up in my body. Because our nervous
system reads it as fight or flight, like it's
going to kill us. So we know we can
rationalize and think that this isn't going
to kill us, but our body is responding as if
it is. So sometimes, just that
acknowledgement of understanding
where it shows up helps settle our
bodies.”

Coaching Practice:
Limitations
Coaching limitations found in
the study
6 “As I reflect on my coaching practice, I
noticed that I don’t ask a lot of probing
questions, or have teachers expland or
clarify when they share. I tend to mirror
what they say, and acknowledge it then
move on to the next person. I want to
interrogate their thinking and perspectives
more in order to help them have a more
transformative experience.”
Participant Takeaways
from Coaching
36 Quote 1: “Coaching relieved fear and
brought importance to the work. It
provided community and I felt like I
wasn’t alone in this work and
understanding its importance.”

Quote 2: “I took away a sense of
community. There are people that are
wanting to do the work and we can
support one another. I'm also taking away
that the work is hard, and that is okay,
and there can be small actionable steps
rather than having to tackle everything at
once.”

Quote 3: “I learned that I let my queer
experiences in middle school drive how I
approach teaching and that is more
dangerous than helpful for the queer
voices in the classroom. I am working
daily to deconstruct this in order to be
more helpful to my students of all
identities.”

Quote 4: “I learned that my teaching
practices were not inclusive, and while I
have every intention to create a safe
environment, it cannot be safe and
affirming if it is not inclusive.”
170

Appendix E: Instructional Guide

Disrupting Cis-
Heteronormativity + Creating
Safe and Affirming Conditions
in the Classroom

171

A Coaching Group Focusing on Critical
Reflection and Rational Discourse

Instructional Guide
Created by Mary Traylor, MSW

172

Table of Contents
Welcome Letter
How to Use Guide
Program Overview
Session 1: Crafting Space for Disruption
Session 2: Cis-Heteronormativity
Session 3: Understanding Fear
Session 4: Setting a Vision
Session 5: Safe and Affirming Conditions
Session 6: Need for Action and Compassion

173

Welcome!
Thank you for using this instructional guide to coach educators to disrupt cis-heteronormativity
in their classroom and beyond, creating safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ children and
youth to grow up in a space where who they are matters! My name is Mary Traylor and I am the
creator of this guide.

A little about me…
I am a Black/biracial, Queer educator and social worker from Los Angeles, California. I am all
these identities and have struggled showing up in this world as my whole self, living in my
totality. I learned at a very early age to protect myself by only showing parts of me that are
deemed normal by societal standards. I was a very observant child, paying close attention to how
relationships work and is impacted by race and gender. Growing up in the 1990’s, schools
mirrored a color blind and cis-heteronormative society. My understanding of humanness was that
you belonged if you followed normative and dominant social structures and conditions. There
wasn’t much room in schools for children to explore identities in safe and confident ways. If you
were different, you were harmed. I learned at a young age to navigate in a space that questions
my humanity. As an adult, I’ve learned that navigating this space isn’t living at all, it’s existing.
We all deserve more than just the ability to exist.
I believe schools have the potential to provide opportunities for all students to learn to love who
they are, even if society is constantly telling them that isn’t possible. I imagine schools to be a
space where Black, Indigenous, and other kids of color get to discern their gender on their own
terms and learn about the vast array of sexual identities safely. I want schools to be spaces where
174

transgender youth are protected and loved fiercely. This is my hope and vision for the future of
schools. As Bettina Love reminds us, this is freedom dreaming!

This guide can be used to help educators disrupt cis-heteronormativity in their classroom and
school community through reflecting on their positionality, teaching practices, and the fear that
may get in the way of disrupting the status quo. Through critical reflection and rational
discourse teachers can learn to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming
conditions for LGBTQ+ students.

Thank you for being part of a community dedicated to disrupting cis-heteronormativity. It is
time to reimagine what safety, affirmation, and care looks like for our children and youth.

In solidarity,
Mary

175

How To Use This Guide
One purpose of creating an instructional guide to share with others, is to offer a tool that is self-
explanatory for coaches, leaders, and others to use given the realization that grants to hire experts
or coaches is limited. Having an experienced coach or facilitator is important, however, having a
tool, such as the instructional guide, will provide access to support for more learning
communities looking to disrupt cis-heteronormativity.

Learning Groups for Interested School Stakeholders
One way to use this curriculum is to offer it to interested members of the school community.
This can mean offering it to only teachers or expanding the offer to other school stakeholders
such as other staff members and parents. Another way to offer this coaching program to school
stakeholders would be, at a district level or schools partnering together, offering small group
coaching to multiple school sites, building a community of people interested in disrupting cis-
heteronormativity across contexts rather than within them. Based on who this curriculum is
offered to, the instructional guide may need to be revised to meet the characteristics of who is
participating (i.e., revise critical reflection prompts to emulate the professional responsibilities of
the participants).

Professional Learning
Another way to use this instructional guide is to offer it as a school-wide professional
development resource. Professional development conducted with K-12 teachers usually derives
from a short-term transmission model; paying no attention to what is going on in a particular
classroom, school, or district; offers little opportunity for participants to become involved in the
176

conversation; and provides no follow-up. As research suggests, professional development
should be schoolwide, long-term with follow up, foster agreement among participants on goals
and vision, have a supportive administration, and acknowledge participants’ existing beliefs and
practices
1
. Given this coaching program was designed as a 6-week program that focuses on the
participants’ own practice, this instructional guide can be used to help foster a long term, school-
wide commitment to disrupting cis-heteronormativity through developing critical reflection and
rational discourse skills to interrogate one’s positionality and practices. An instructional coach
or school leader can study the guide and use it to facilitate school-wide professional development
sessions that can be six sessions in length or expanded to 12 (each session broken into two parts
to allow more time to discuss and deepen each topic).

Instructional Guide Transferability
Lastly, it is important to note that the instructional guide focuses on how to use critical reflection
and rational discourse as tools to reflect on one’s positionality and teaching practices in order to
disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming conditions in the classroom. The
guide can also be a comprehensive tool to coach others about other social justice topics, such as:
racism, patriarchy, disability justice/ableism, and more. The instructional guide can be used as a
template to adapt to other social justice topics, as needed. We can use critical reflection and
rational discourse as tools to interrogate, critically examine, and transform conditional thoughts,
internalized oppression, and biases to create safe and affirming classrooms for all students.

1
Richardson, V. (2003). The dilemmas of professional development. Phi delta kappan, 84(5), 401-406.

177

Program Overview
Introduction
This instructional guide was developed to help teachers reflect on their positionality and teaching
practice in order to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming conditions for
LGBTQ+ students. This instructional guide pulls inspiration from Queer, trans, gender non-
conforming Black Indigenous and People of Color who have fought and continue to fight for
liberation of all people. This instructional guide is also grounded in critical social theories and
transformative learning theories. Through this program, participants also reflect on their
relationship with fear. Through the development of this program and instructional guide, I have
come to understand fear as a catalyst for growth, something to attend to intentionally so as to
break the cycle of socialization. Understanding fear as a byproduct of the socialization into
systems of oppression has helped me become a more compassionate and determined coach and
leader. I understand that fear is not something to be ashamed of, but something to understand
and connect to internalized oppression. Being present to and really seeing the way in which fear
is inextricably linked to the reproduction of the status quo can support someone to develop a
disruptive practice.
“When I dare to be powerful- to use my strength in the service of my vision, then it becomes
less and less important whether I am afraid.”- Audre Lorde

178

LGBTQ+
I have rearranged the letters to highlight the struggles, violence, and oppressions trans and
visibly gender non-conforming people face as they exist in this world. Therefore, LGBTQ+
stands for transgender, lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer/questioning and more.
Critical Reflection
For learners to transform their perspectives, they must engage in critical reflection. According to
Mezirow, Adult learning occurs in four ways- elaborating existing frames of reference, learning
frames of reference, transforming points of view, and transforming habits of mind
2
. Critical
reflection is a component of all four. As Brookfield states in his book, Becoming a Critically
Reflective Teacher,
“Critical reflection is the sustained and intentional process of identifying and checking the
accuracy and validity of our teaching assumptions.”
Guided by Brookfield’s book, this instructional guide teaches what critical reflection is and how
to use it in practice to help examine their positionality and practices and work towards disrupting
cis-heteronormativity to create safe and affirming conditions in their classroom.
Rational Discourse
Grounded in transformative learning theory, rational discourse assesses the validity of one’s
construction of meaning. This curriculum focuses on building the following conditions for
rational discourse: establishing a sense of bravery, openness, and provide access to accurate and
complete information about cis-heteronormativity and its pervasiveness in schools. A

2
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass, 350 Sansome
Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1310.

179

disorienting dilemma, the initiation of a transformative learning experience usually highlighting
a crisis that triggers a questioning of assumptions, can be used to facilitate transformative
learning. In session six, The Man Enough Podcast-Alok: The Urgent Need for Compassion
Video, is used to trigger a disorienting dilemma. Feel free to use other activities, prompts, or
lessons to trigger a disorienting dilemma in your learners.
Safe and Affirming Conditions
The goal of the program is to help educators disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe and
affirming conditions for students in their classrooms. For the purpose of this instructional guide,
safe and affirming conditions refers to the intentionality in creating spaces of protection, joy, and
exploration for LGBTQ+ students. When creating safe and affirming conditions, teachers are
intentionality interrogating and disrupting cis-heteronormativity through the use of queer
affirming curriculum and teaching practices, and a focus on an inclusive community that
responds appropriately to harm. Sadowski reminds us that
“Safety is a basic prerequisite for schooling- children and adolescents need to feel and be safe
at school in order to learn”
In his book, Safe is Not Enough: Better Schools for LGBTQ Students, Sadowski also helps us
imagine not just a ‘better’ school for LGBTQ students, but an ideal educational experience for
them. Creating safe and affirming conditions is imperative to the transformative work of
building schools ready to sustain the wellness of the communities they serve, teaching racially
diverse students, early on, about the variance in identities, and helping them to understand that
all people are worthy of compassion and care.

180

“Disruptive” Project
The instructional guide and coaching program invite participants to create projects aimed at
disrupting cis-heteronormativity with the professional context of each participant. This project
may or may not be complete by the end of the program and can also be a choice. The project can
be a lesson plan, unit of study, teaching practice, school wide project or initiative, or a
commitment to learn more about LGBTQ+ issues and education.
Cisnormativity and Heteronormativity
In this instructional guide, we focus on the importance of and ways to disrupt cis-
heteronormativity. Cis-heteronormativity is the combination of two words: cisnormativity and
heteronormativity. A lot of resources, cited in this instructional guide, refers to heteronormativity
as an all-encompassing term that acknowledges, sex assignment, gender identity, gender
expression, sexuality, and relationship. Therefore, there may be moments in the program when a
resource references heteronormativity; we can assume that it is all encompassing unless noted
differently.
Note on Work/Homework
Homework is not assigned as part of this coaching program. Educators have a heavy workload.
The lessons and activities cover what needs to be covered, in the program. This leaves
opportunities for participants to do supplemental learning, expanding on concepts learned in
session, as they choose. The only “assignment” that is done outside of the coaching sessions is
the “disruption” project.

181

Session 1: Crafting Space for Disruption

Guiding Questions
● What does a brave space look like? How can we create one?
● How do you distinguish between a descriptive, comparative, and critical reflection?
● What does it mean and how do we illuminate power and uncover hegemony through
critical reflection?

Learning Outcomes
● By the end of this session you will be able to:
○ Articulate the purpose of creating a brave space
○ Explain the difference between descriptive, comparative, and critical reflection
○ Articulate the purpose of illuminating power and uncovering hegemony through
critical reflection

Critical Reflection Prompt/s
● Write about your teaching practice; where you are in terms of creating safe and affirming
conditions for your students and how you disrupt cis-heteronormativity, if at all, in your
classroom or position. Explore the ideas of power dynamics and hegemony.

Agenda (2 hour session)
● 30 Minutes
○ Acknowledgements and Introductions
○ Agenda Overview
○ Crafting Space (Guidelines and Assumptions)
● 20 Minutes
○ I am From Poem Activity
● 5 Minute BREAK
● 20 Minutes
○ Introduction to Typology Reflection (Jay & Johnson, 2002)
● 15 Minutes
○ Introduction to Illuminating Power and Hegemony (Brookfield, 2017)
● 30 Minutes
182

○ Critical Reflection and Discussion
○ Closing

Activities
● 5 mins- Acknowledgements
○ Begin every session by saying/reading, “We start this session honoring the legacy
of trans, queer, gender non-conforming BIPOC who fought and continue to fight
for liberation of all people. We honor their work and continue their legacy.”
● 5 mins- Introductions
○ Have participants share the following information
■ Name
■ Pronouns (if desired- requiring it might unintentionally force someone to
come out when they didn’t want to)
■ Why did you join the coaching program and what are you hoping to get
out of it?
● 2 minutes-Agenda Overview
○ Go over the agenda for the day and answer any questions the group may have
before you move on to the following activities.
● 18-20 minutes- Crafting Space (Bravery vs. Safety)
○ Introduction script: It is important that we create a space, together, that
encourages us to make courageous choices within the coaching sessions. If we
are to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity within our teaching
practices, making brave choices in our discussions will be necessary. My goal is
to help cultivate a space where you all feel comfortable to practice making brave
choices through your reflections and through challenging conversations. So how
do we do that? I believe that the first step is for us, together, to craft guidelines
that will guide our time together. I will first suggest and review a few guidelines I
think will help us establish a brave space, and then will take suggestions from you
all.
○ Assumption and Guidelines provided to participants:
■ We can’t promise safety in this space, but we can create a space that
promotes courageous discourse
■ We center consent-based practices, participating in ways that feel
comfortable and are accessible to our abilities and needs
■ We address behaviors, ideas, and choices knowing that we are capable of
change and growth
■ There is a wealth of information and experience in this group AND
everyone has immanent value
■ We honor and validate feelings and somatic experiences as they arise
during the group sessions.
183

○ Reference Arao and Clemens (2013) article, and discuss the following points from
the article:
■ It’s important to create a space that emphasizes the need for courage
rather than the illusion of safety
■ For marginalized communities safety is not and cannot be guaranteed due
to oppressive structures and systems
■ Authentic learning about what it takes to disrupt oppressive structure
requires risk, difficulty, and controversy which aren’t compatible with
safety
○ Ask the following questions (either have participants go in small groups to
discuss, and then share out; or have students discuss in a whole group- depending
on time and openness of the group to share):
■ What are your thoughts on the assumptions and guidelines provided?
Would you suggest any revisions to them? (have them displayed so
participants can reread)
■ What do you think about the ways we can create a brave, not simply a
safe, space?
■ Do you have any assumptions or guidelines to add?
○ Add any additional assumptions and guidelines to the list created by participants
■ Additional assumptions and guidelines that have been created by past
participants in the pilot program included:
● We will do our best to speak our mind
● We understand that we all have been conditioned by dominant,
societal narratives that influence our thinking; therefore, we will
focus on learning and growing from our reflections and
conversations with each other.
● 20 minutes- I Am From Activity
○ Begin with reading the quote: “If our identity shapes our agency, how do we give
voice to our being to inspire our doing”
○ Intro Script: “ We are going to now write I am From poems. Each of you will
write a poem with the sentence starter ‘I am from’. You will think of different
locations and aspects of identity to create ‘I am from’ statements. Poems will not
be collected, and you will be asked to share the statements you are comfortable
sharing with the group.”
■ Note: For full instructions, read Teaching Race: How to Help Students
Unmask and Challenge Racism Ch. 5 (Link to book is located in the
resource section)
○ I am from possible statement focal areas:
■ I am from (geography)
■ I am from (gender)
■ I am from (class)
■ I am from (ethnicity/race/nationality)
■ I am from (sexual orientation)
■ I am from (family)
■ I am from (education)
■ I am from (heroes/role models)
184

■ I am from (nature)
■ I am from (conflict/loss)
■ I am from (ability/disability)
■ I am from (religion/spirituality)
■ I am from (politics)
■ I am from (social movement)
○ Share an example poem (create one about yourself, prior to the first session)
■ An example poem to model after:
● I am from California. Los Angeles to be exact. From the westside
where diversity was a common encounter growing up.
● I am from a country where racism runs rampant. Where my own
ancestors have been oppressed and the oppressor.
● I am from an understanding that sexuality, gender, and race are
all colonized social constructs.
● I am from a queer space that does not have to conform to a
heteronormative/binary existence.
● I am from an able body that has provided more for me than I’ve
ever given it credit for.
● I am from two parents and a large extended family that protected
and cared for me, even with a multitude of challenges.
○ Invite participants to spend about 10 minutes writing their poems.
○ Share and discuss poems as a whole group, but only the ones that they feel
comfortable sharing/and the statements they feel comfortable sharing.
■ Reflection prompt: How might the I am From poems affect your practice?
● 5 minutes- Break
● 20 minutes- Descriptive, Comparative and Critical Typology Reflection (Jay & Johnson,
2002)
○ Intro script, “We can use Jay and Johnson’s Typology of reflection to help us
learn how to write different types of reflections, and also as a guide to assess if
your reflection is critical or not. Let’s go over the typology worksheet together,
and then you and a partner will attempt to write a descriptive and comparative
reflection. After we work in partnerships, we will share our descriptions with the
whole group, and use the typology to identify if the reflections created are
descriptive and comparative. Later we will all practice writing a critical
reflection after examining one I’ve written.”
○ Preview the typology as a group, and then give each participant a copy to read on
their own and reference to when doing the next activity
○ Direct participants to get into pairs and give them 10 minutes to come up with a
descriptive and comparative reflection.
○ Debrief: What is the main difference between descriptive and comparative?
● 15 minutes- Illuminating Power and Uncovering Hegemony (Brookfield, 2017)
○ Intro script, “In the book, Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher, Brookfield
asks the questions, what makes reflection critical? He says that reflection has two
distinct purposes: to illuminate power and uncover hegemony. We are now going
185

to look at an excerpt from his book, showing a description of what illuminating
power and uncovering hegemony is and how to do it. After we learn what
illuminating power and uncovering hegemony looks like in a critical reflection,
we’re going to each think of a time when power dynamics showed up in your
classroom and think of an assumption or practice that seems to make your life
easier but actually works against your long-term interest.”
○ Have teachers read about illuminating power and uncovering hegemony in
chapter 1 of Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher.
○ Discussion: Think of a time when you were the one in power or were complicit in
maintaining the status quo. How did these power dynamics show up in your
classroom? Think of an assumption or practice that seems to make your life easier
but actually works against your long-term interest?
● 30 minutes Critical Reflection
○ Modeling Activity: Share the following reflection (or one that you create as a
facilitator) before having teachers reflect on their own. (note: this is one of the
author’s reflection)
■ Example of a Critical Reflection: When I was subbing for a seventh-grade
class, I was asked why I care so much about LGBTQ+ issues. This
student was calling classmates gay in a derogatory way. I directed him to
come sit next to me, while the other students were doing their work. I
quietly had a conversation about the impacts of calling someone gay. We
had a ten-minute conversation about the incident. At the end of the
conversation he asked, “Ms. Traylor, why do you care so much, are you
gay?” I impulsively said no without much thought. This ended our
conversation, and it was time for the kids to go out to recess. During
recess, I couldn’t stop thinking about how quickly I said no. Why did I say
no? What assumption influenced that decision? Was I afraid of losing the
student’s “respect” as their teacher? It was in this moment that I realized
that I usually would tell myself that I wasn’t “out” professionally because
I didn’t want TGLBQ+ issues and inclusivity to only be perceived to be
important to queer people. However, there was more to it. I have deeply
internalized a lot of shame around my own identity, and really didn’t want
students to know in fear of losing power over them. I hadn’t really
processed the implications of heteronormativity on my own life, personally
and professionally; and realized, in that moment with the student, I was
being complicit in heteronormativity by not allowing the student to see me
as a queer teacher. As I prepare to lead this coaching group, it will be
liberating for me to embrace and express myself as a coach who is
queer. I will have to be mindful of how my internalized shame and
186

assumptions have shaped my own positionality and experiences to
understand my coaching actions throughout this dissertation study.
○ Group discussion: “Looking at the reflection, what do you see?” Use the
reflection to guide your answers.
■ Note: guide teachers (if they need help) to reflect on power dynamics and
hegemonic assumptions and other components that would make this
reflection critical, not simply descriptive or comparative
○ Have teachers critically reflect, answering the following prompt: Write about
your teaching practice; where you are in terms of creating safe and affirming
conditions for your students and how you disrupt cis-heteronormativity, if at all,
in your classroom or position. Explore the ideas of power dynamics and
hegemony.
■ Have participants, share if they would like
○ Closing
■ Share quote to end the session: “You do not have to be me in order for us
to fight alongside each other.” -Audre Lorde
■ Ask if participants have any final thoughts or questions before wrapping
up the session.

Resources:
○ Teaching Intersectionality Through “I Am From…” (Klein, 2019) from the book
Teaching Race How to Help Students Unmask and Challenge Racism (Brookfield et al.,
2019): Link to download ebook for free
○ I Am Poem: Link to template
○ From Safe Spaces to Brave Space (Arao and Clemens, 2013): Link to article
○ Descriptive, Comparative and Critical Typology Reflection (Jay & Johnson, 2002): Link
to article and typology reflection
○ Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher, Brookfield 2017 Link to download ebook for
free
○ Session Google Slides: Link to slides

187

Session 2: Cis-Heteronormativity
Guiding Questions
● How do I decipher between and identify three different types of assumptions
(prescriptive, paradigmatic, and causal)?
● What does cis-heteronormativity look like in my daily life (both personal and
professional)?
● How can I offer feedback to my colleagues to help expand and deepen their critical
reflection?

Learning Outcomes
● By the end of this session you will be able to:
○ Articulate the difference between and define the following types of assumptions:
Prescriptive, Paradigmatic, and Causal
○ Identify how cis-heteronormativity shows up in daily life (personal and
professional)
○ Utilize the Jay and Johnson (2000) reflective typology to expand and deepen
critical reflections and provide feedback to colleagues

Critical Reflection Prompt/s
● How is your reality similar and different from the realities of your students? Explore
deeply the ideas of identity, positionality, and assumptions, etc. in relation to race,
gender, and sexuality.

Agenda (2 hour session)
● 30 Minutes
○ Acknowledgements
○ Meditative Check Ins
○ Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Agenda Overview
● 20 Minutes
○ Intro to Cis-Heteronormativity
○ Small Group Discussion
○ Whole Group Share and Quote Discussion
● 5 Minute BREAK
188

● 30 Minutes
○ Prescriptive, Paradigmatic, and Causal Assumptions (Brookfield, 2017)
● 15 Minutes
○ Critical Reflection Writing Time
● 20 Minutes
○ Critical Reflection Feedback Activity
○ Closing
Activities
● 5 mins- Acknowledgements
○ Begin every session by saying/reading, “We start this session honoring the legacy
of trans, queer, gender non conforming BIPOC who fought have continue to fight
for liberation of all people. We honor their work and continue their legacy.”
● 10 mins- Meditative Check In
○ Have participants share the following information
■ On a scale from 1-5, how are you doing? Is there anything the group can
help you with?
■ Share a funny/joyful/kind moment you’ve experienced with your class
recently?
● 8 minutes- Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Review assumptions and guidelines:
■ We can’t promise safety in this space, but we can create a space that
promotes courageous discourse
■ We center consent-based practices, participating in ways that feel
comfortable and are accessible to our abilities and needs
■ We address behaviors, ideas, and choices knowing that we are capable of
change and growth
■ There is a wealth of information and experience in this group AND
everyone has immanent value
■ We honor and validate feelings and somatic experiences as they arise
during the group sessions.
■ *And any additional created by the group
○ Review Arao and Clemens (2013) article, and discuss:
■ What can we do to cultivate a brave space during today’s session?
● 2 minutes-Agenda Overview
○ Go over the agenda for the day and answer any questions the group may have
before you move on to the following activities.
● 30 minutes- Introduction to Cis-Heteronormativity
○ Whole Group Discussion: Discuss the following (use the resources below to help
you articulate and define cisnormativity and heteronormativity):
■ What is cis-heteronormativity?
■ Constructs of a cis-heteronormative society
■ Assumptions and Consequences
189

● Note: Some organizations group heteronormativity and
cisnormativity into one description. For example, information on
the slides from the Mariwala Health Initiative define
heteronormativity in a way that encompasses sexuality and the
gender binary into one definition.
○ Group Activity: How does cis-heteronormativity show up in your life?
■ In small groups have participants brainstorms ways that cis-
heteronormativity shows up in their personal and professional/school life.
■ Each group will create a list and share with the whole group
○ Quote Reflection: Read the following quote
■ “We wouldn’t have to ‘come out’ if it wasn’t assumed that we’re straight
to begin with.”
■ Discuss: What does this quote make you think of? What thoughts come
up for you?
● 5 minutes- Break
● 30 minutes- Prescriptive, Paradigmatic, and Causal Assumptions (Brookfield, 2017)
○ Intro script, “Today we are going to talk about assumptions, and how to unearth
our assumptions through critical reflection. Brookfield identifies that there are
three types of assumptions. The first assumption is paradigmatic assumptions.
These assumptions are used to put the world in categories. An example of a
paradigmatic assumption is ‘student’s behavior will change if they are punished.’
The next assumption is a prescriptive assumption. These are assumptions we
think should happen in a particular situation. An example of this type of
assumption is ‘teachers should center student voices.’ The third assumption is a
causal assumption. These are assumptions about how different parts of the world
work and about the conditions under which these can be changed. An example of
this assumption is ‘using learning contracts increases students’ self-directedness.’
We’re going to explore these three assumptions more by doing a jigsaw activity.”
○ Jigsaw activity:
■ Divide the group into three groups.
■ Each group will be in charge of learning more about a certain assumption
(reading excerpts from Brookfield’s book- ch.1 and ch.2 and doing their
own research)- charting notes and examples on a Google slide.
■ New groups will be formed to create a group with someone from each
initial assumption group.
■ Groups will discuss each assumption, sharing the information they learned
from their research.
● 15 minutes- Critical Reflection
○ Have teachers critically reflect, answering the following prompt: How is your
reality similar and different from the realities of your students? Explore deeply
the ideas of identity, positionality, and assumptions, etc. in relation to race,
gender, and sexuality.
190

■ Have participants, share if they would like
● 20 minutes- Critical Reflection Feedback Activity and Closing
○ Critical Reflection Feedback Activity
■ After teachers finish writing their critical reflection, explain the next
activity by saying, “we are going to practice giving each other feedback
using Jay and Johnson’s (2000) three typology descriptions. Is there one
person who is interested in sharing their critical reflection to receive
feedback from me? As one of you reads your reflection, I will take notes,
and then offer feedback modeling how to use the reflection typology to
expand or deepen your critical reflections.”
■ Find a volunteer and provide feedback to their critical reflection
■ Then divide the group into pairs, inviting them to use the typical questions
on the typology to give feedback to their partner.
■ Have groups work in pairs for 10 minutes and then debrief (whole group)
the process when complete.
○ Closing:
■ Share quote to end the session: “I was not born in the wrong body, I was
born into a society that refuses to acknowledge the capacity of this body.”
-J Mase III
■ Ask if participants have any final thoughts or questions before wrapping
up the session.
Resources:
● Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher, Brookfield 2017 Link to download ebook for
free
● Descriptive, Comparative and Critical Typology Reflection (Jay & Johnson, 2002): Link
to article and typology reflection
● Session Google Slides: Link to slides
● Defining Cis-Heteronormativity Resources:
○ Mariwala Health Initiative
○ LGBTQ+ Primary Hub
○ Queer Cafe

191

Session 3: Understanding Fear

Guiding Questions
● How does cis-heteronormativity show up in schools?
● What role does fear play in our practice when thinking about disrupting cis-
heteronormativity?
● What is perspective taking?

Learning Outcomes
● By the end of this session you will be able to:
○ Explain perspective taking.
○ Articulate how cis-heteronormativity shows up in schools.
○ Explore and Explain the role fear plays in your teaching practice, if at all.
Critical Reflection Prompt/s
● What is a class practice that cultivates safety and affirming conditions in your classroom?
Who, specifically, does this practice support? Who might it leave out? What class
practice do you want to add this school year that will help cultivate safe and affirming
conditions for LGBTQ+ students? What do you need to be able to do this?

Agenda (2 hour session)
● 20 Minutes
○ Acknowledgements
○ Meditative Check Ins
○ Agenda Overview
○ Assumptions and Guidelines Review
● 30 Minutes
○ Intro to Perspective Taking (Mezirow, 1991)
○ Critical Reflection
● 5 Minute BREAK
● 15 Minutes
○ Whole group critical reflection discussion
● 30 Minutes
○ Exploring Cis-Heteronormativity in School through two Op-Ed Articles
● 20 Minutes
192

○ Discussion about fear
○ Closing
Activities
● 1 mins- Acknowledgements
○ Begin every session by saying/reading, “We start this session honoring the legacy
of trans, queer, gender non-conforming BIPOC who fought have continue to fight
for liberation of all people. We honor their work and continue their legacy.”
● 10 mins- Meditative Check In
○ Have participants share the following information
■ How are you feeling? Choose three words to describe your mood, state of
being right now?
● 2 minutes-Agenda Overview
○ Go over the agenda for the day and answer any questions the group may have
before you move on to the following activities.
● 7 minutes- Crafting Space Review
○ Review assumptions and guidelines:
■ We can’t promise safety in this space, but we can create a space that
promotes courageous discourse
■ We center consent-based practices, participating in ways that feel
comfortable and are accessible to our abilities and needs
■ We address behaviors, ideas, and choices knowing that we are capable of
change and growth
■ There is a wealth of information and experience in this group AND
everyone has immanent value
■ We honor and validate feelings and somatic experiences as they arise
during the group sessions.
■ *And any additional created by the group
○ Quick share: How are we doing in terms of accomplishing these assumptions and
guidelines?
● 30 minutes- Introduction to Perspective Taking (Mezirow, 1991) and Critical Reflection
○ Define Perspective Taking and introduce the critical reflection prompt by saying,
“One thing that can be very challenging is getting yourself out of a familiar
perspective and looking at an event or an experience in a fundamentally different
way. This is Mezirow’s idea of perspective taking. Today, as you critically
reflect, you will be prompted to think about your students in ways that you may
not have thought about them before. You are going to think about how your
teaching practices may positively or negatively be impacting your students. We
have explored how assumptions inform our actions. Now, we are going to
challenge ourselves to look at our work through a different lens in order to shift
our perspective about our teaching practice.”
○ Critical Reflection: What is a class practice that cultivates safety and affirming
conditions in your classroom? Who, specifically, does this practice support? Who
might it leave out? What class practice do you want to add this school year that
193

will help cultivate safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students? What do
you need to be able to do this?
■ Have participants, share if they would like
● 5 minutes- Break
● 30 minutes- Exploring Cis-Heteronormativity in Schools Activity
○ Intro script: “Today we are going to deepen our understanding of cis-
heteronormativity and look closer into its pervasiveness in schools. I’m going to
invite each of you to spend 15 minutes reading two op-ed articles. Take notes as
you read. We will then discuss the two articles, exploring cis-heteronormativity
further.”
○ Give teacher 15 minutes to read both articles:
■ “The Problems with Heteronormativity in American Sex Education” by
Rudy Malcom
■ “Heteronormativity in School” by Jason Flom
○ Discuss the articles in small groups. Ask the following questions:
■ What are your thoughts/reflections from the first article? second?
■ What do both articles have in common? How do they differ?
■ What are some takeaways?
● 20 minutes- Small Group discussion about Fear and Closing
○ Intro script: “Fear is a major barrier to disrupting any system of oppression, and
we are going to explore our relationship with fear and how it shows up in our
work. Today we are going to have a small group discussion about fear. You will
spend 10 minutes in small groups and then we will come back and debrief.”
○ Small group discussion questions:
■ What is fear and how does it impact your life personally and
professionally?
■ What fears do you have around disrupting cis-heteronormativity within
your personal and professional life?
■ Where do these fears stem from? Are they rational? Where do you feel
the fear/how do you experience it in your body?
■ How do your fears impair your work, if at all?
○ Debrief
○ Closing:
■ Share quote to end the session: “When we speak we are afraid our words
will not be heard or welcomed. But when we are silent, we are still afraid.
So it is better to speak.” -Audre Lorde
■ Ask if participants have any final thoughts or questions before wrapping
up the session.
Resources:
194

● Op-Ed Article 1: “The Problems with Heteronormativity in American Sex Education” by
Rudy Malcom Link to article
● Op-Ed Article 2: “Heteronormativity in School” by Jason Flom Link to article
● Session Google Slides: Link to slides

Session 4: Setting a Vision
Guiding Questions
● How do you address perspectives different from ours when it comes to social justice
topics and manifestations of oppression?
● How do you use visioning strategies to help disrupt cis-heteronormativity

Learning Outcomes
● By the end of this session you will be able to:
○ Examine alternative perspectives about LGBTQ+ education in schools
○ Articulate the urgency to disrupt cis-heteronormativity
○ Explain how to use visioning strategies to help disrupt cis-heteronormativity

Critical Reflection Prompt/s
● How do you feel about talking with your students about gender, and sexuality? Explore
any fears or other emotional barriers that may come up for you.

Agenda (2 hour session)
● 20 Minutes
○ Acknowledgements
○ Meditative Check Ins
○ Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Agenda Overview
● 30 Minutes
○ What? So What? Now What? Video Activity
● 5 Minute BREAK
● 35 Minutes
○ Critical Reflection and Discussion
● 30 Minutes
195

○ Introduction to Disruption Project
○ Vision Activity
○ Closing
Activities
● 5 mins- Acknowledgements
○ Begin every session by saying/reading, “We start this session honoring the legacy
of trans, queer, gender non-conforming BIPOC who fought have continue to fight
for liberation of all people. We honor their work and continue their legacy.”
● 10 mins- Meditative Check In
○ Have participants share the following information
■ Think of a person (ancestor, living, elder, family member, know/don’t
know) you want to call in to help ground you in this work as disruptive
educators. Who/why?
● 3 minutes- Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Review assumptions and guidelines:
■ We can’t promise safety in this space, but we can create a space that
promotes courageous discourse
■ We center consent-based practices, participating in ways that feel
comfortable and are accessible to our abilities and needs
■ We address behaviors, ideas, and choices knowing that we are capable of
change and growth
■ There is a wealth of information and experience in this group AND
everyone has immanent value
■ We honor and validate feelings and somatic experiences as they arise
during the group sessions.
■ *And any additional created by the group
● 2 minutes-Agenda Overview
○ Go over the agenda for the day and answer any questions the group may have
before you move on to the following activities.
● 30 minutes- What? So What? Now What? Group Activity
○ Intro script: “We are going to use a popular reflect model to help us process and
discuss two YouTube videos. “What? So What? Now What?” is a well-known
reflection model developed in 2001. It is based on these three simple questions.
Today, we are going to explore alternative beliefs about LGBTQ+ education from
people who have different views from the ones cultivated in this training and
don’t believe in disrupting cis-heteronormativity. We’re going to break into small
groups, watch two videos, and complete the reflection chart. Be prepared to
report back for a whole group discussion.”
○ Break participants into two groups
○ Have participants watch the videos and complete charts on the Google slides
○ Come back after 15 minutes for group discussion and debrief.
● 5 minutes- Break
● 35 minutes- Critical Reflection and Discussion
196

○ Give teachers 15 minutes to write, answering the prompt: How do you feel about
talking with your students about gender and sexuality? Explore any fears or other
emotional barriers that may come up for you.
○ Have teachers share their reflection, and guide their discussion to expand and go
deeper. Check that their reflections are critical.
● 30 minutes- Intro to “Disruption” Project and Vision Activity
○ Disruption Project
■ Describe to teachers that they will be creating a “disruption” project. This
is a project that’s focus is to disrupt cis-heteronormativity and create safe
and affirming classroom conditions. These projects can meet the need of
the participants; they can be a lesson plan, unit, teaching practice, school
community project, commitment to learn more, etc. Every participant will
be in a different place in terms of their knowledge of cis-heteronormativity
and their comfort level in disruption. Meet the participants where they are,
as long as they are working towards disruption in their project plans.
■ Teachers will complete the chart on the Google slides, answering the
following questions:
● How would you like to disrupt cis-heteronormativity this year?
● What supports do you need?
● What accountability structure works for you? (how would you like
to be held accountable to your growth/transformation?)
■ Let teachers know that you will be following up with them individually to
help them create and implement their project.
○ Vision Activity
■ Intro script: “The last thing we are going to do today is some visioning.
We are going to learn how to use visioning to support the work you do in
the classroom. I believe it’s important to imagine what you want to see in
your classroom and school community, and then work towards bringing
that vision into fruition.”
■ Activity instructions:
● In small groups, create a vision board for your school community
that represents how your community can be a safe and affirming
place for all students.
● Search for images, words, quotes, phrases, colors, etc. and create a
virtual vision board on the Google slides with your group. Be
prepared to share back with the whole group.
● In your vision board, think about the following questions:
○ How would you like to see you, your colleagues, and the
school disrupt cis-heteronormativity?
○ What can you imagine a non-cis-heteronormative school
197

looks like, feels like, sounds like?
○ Closing:
■ Share quote to end the session: “In our work and in our living, we must
recognize that difference is a reason for celebrations and growth, rather
than a reason for destruction.” -Audre Lorde
■ Ask if participants have any final thoughts or questions before wrapping
up the session.
Resources:
● What? So What? Now What? Model (Rolfe et al., 2001) Link to Questions
● YouTube Video Clip 1: “Parents Outraged After Kindergarten Teacher Discusses Gender
Identity” Link to video
● YouTube Video Clip 2: “Schools Are Teaching Gender and Sexual Identity” Link to
video
● Session Google Slides: Link to slides

Session 5: Safe and Affirming Conditions
Guiding Questions
● What does it mean to create safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students in your
classroom?
● What is the difference between a mission and vision statement?
● How can a mission and vision statement help you stay grounded in your commitment to
disrupt cis-heteronormativity?

Learning Outcomes
● By the end of this session, you will be able to:
○ Explain the idea of creating safe and affirming conditions
○ Articulate the difference between a mission and vision statement
○ Explain the utility of developing a mission and vision statement

Critical Reflection Prompt/s
198

● How would you create and/or how do you create safe and affirming conditions for your
students? Reflect on your own identity, positionality, and disposition, along with any fear
that may arise in relation to creating safe and affirming conditions for students.

Agenda (2 hour session)
● 20 Minutes
○ Acknowledgements
○ Meditative Check Ins
○ Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Agenda Overview
● 30 Minutes
○ Defining Safe and Affirming Conditions
○ Critical Reflection
● 5 Minute BREAK
● 30 Minutes
○ Critical Reflection Discussion
● 35 Minutes
○ Mission and Vision Activity
○ Small Group Share
○ Whole Group Debrief
○ Closing
Activities
● 5 mins- Acknowledgements
○ Begin every session by saying/reading, “We start this session honoring the legacy
of trans, queer, gender non-conforming BIPOC who fought have continue to fight
for liberation of all people. We honor their work and continue their legacy.”
● 10 mins- Meditative Check In
○ Have participants share the following information
■ What is one personal win and one professional win that has happened to
you lately?
● 3 minutes- Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Review assumptions and guidelines:
■ We can’t promise safety in this space, but we can create a space that
promotes courageous discourse
■ We center consent-based practices, participating in ways that feel
comfortable and are accessible to our abilities and needs
■ We address behaviors, ideas, and choices knowing that we are capable of
change and growth
■ There is a wealth of information and experience in this group AND
everyone has immanent value
199

■ We honor and validate feelings and somatic experiences as they arise
during the group sessions.
■ *And any additional created by the group
● 2 minutes-Agenda Overview
○ Go over the agenda for the day and answer any questions the group may have
before you move on to the following activities.
● 30 minutes- Defining Safe and Affirming Conditions and Critical Reflection
○ Intro script: “This coaching group is about exploring one’s positionality and
teaching practices in order to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity and
creating safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+ students. But what does safe
and affirming conditions mean? We are going to explore that idea together
before we write our critical reflection.”
○ 10-minute Discussion Activity
■ Have teachers read the following quotes cited from research:
● “Yet the notion of Gay Straight Alliances (GSAs) as a “safe space”
or certain teachers’ rooms as “safe zones,” as well as the framing
of initiatives to benefit LGBTQ students as “safe schools”
programming, raises a number of crucial questions as educators
and advocates look toward what must happen next to build on
these successes. If a certain place in the school is designated as a
safe space, what does that say about the rest of the building? If
certain educators are seen as “safe” for students to talk to about
issues that are central to their lives, what about the others? Does a
school administration have a responsibility to ensure that LGBTQ
students feel supported by all their teachers in every learning space
in the building, not just treated with mere tolerance by the
majority? Is safety the only thinking to which LGBTQ students are
entitled at school? What about the skills and knowledge they need
to be effective, engaged members of their society as LGBTQ
youth? Finally, are LGBTQ students a monolithic group with one
basic common need: safety? What differences exist among various
subgroups within the LGBTQ student population-boys and girls,
transgender students, LGBTQ students of color- and the way they
experience the school climate and programs? What would an
optimal education for all these young people look like?”
3

● “The pervasive nature of systemic and institutionalized oppression
precludes the creation of safety in a dialogue situated, as it must
be, within said system. As Wise (2004) observed with respect to
race, ‘this country is never safe for people of color. Its schools are
not safe; its streets are not safe; its places of employment are not
safe; its health care system is not safe’ (par. 35). Though Wise
focuses on racism, we argue that his formulation about safety can
also be applied to examinations of sexism, homophobia,
heterosexualism, ableism, religious-spiritual oppression, ageism,

3
Sadowski, M. (2020). Safe is not enough: Better schools for LGBTQ students. Harvard Education Press.
200

U.S.-centrism, and other manifestations of oppression. Viewed
through this lens, we see that assurances of safety for target group
members are misguided”.
4

■ Have teachers participate in a quick discussion answering the following
questions:
● How would you define safe and affirming conditions for LGBTQ+
students based on these quotes and your own experience and
knowledge?
● What does safety and affirmation look like for your classroom
community?
○ Give teachers 20 minutes to write, answering the prompt: How would you create
and/or how do you create safe and affirming conditions for your students? Reflect
on your own identity, positionality, and disposition, along with any fear that may
arise in relation to creating safe and affirming conditions for students.
● 5 minutes- Break
● 30 minutes- Critical Reflection Discussion
○ Have teachers share their critical reflection and guide their discussion to expand
and go deeper. Check that their reflections are critical.
● 35 minutes- Mission and Vision Activity
○ Intro script: “Now we are going to create a mission and vision statement for our
classroom. A mission statement describes the actions taken to actualize a vision
and a vision statement describes what you envision or want to see. We are going
to think of and create a mission statement as a disruptive educator and a vision
for your classroom or school community.”
○ Share an example you have written (as the coach). Here’s an example of a
possible teacher mission/vision statement:
■ Mission: I want to use my platform to teach students critical thinking
skills to examine cis-heteronormativity and gender.
■ Vision: I envision students being able to think critically about the way
society views gender.
○ Give teachers 15 minutes to craft a vision and mission statement to add to the
Google classroom slides.
○ Have teachers share their mission and vision in small groups for 10 minutes, and
then come back for a whole group debrief.
○ Closing:

4
Arao, B., & Clemens, K. (2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces. The art of effective facilitation: Reflections
from social justice educators, 135-150.

201

■ Share quote to end the session: “Gender is not what people look like to
other people; it is what we know ourselves to be. No one else should be
able to tell you who you are; that’s for you to decide.” -Alok Vaid Menon
■ Ask if participants have any final thoughts or questions before wrapping
up the session.
Resources:
● Beyond “Safe” Schools: Educating the Next Generation of LGBTQ Students (Sadowski,
2016)- Link to Chapter
● From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces (Arao & Clemens, 2013): Link to article
● Session Google Slides: Link to slides

Session 6: Need for Action and Compassion
Guiding Questions
● How do we consider compassion to be an integral part to disrupting cis-
heteronormativity?
● What have we learned from this program and the role fear plays in our teaching
practices?

Learning Outcomes
● By the end of this session you will be able to:
○ Explain the difference between comprehension and compassion in order to move
towards liberation for all people
○ Explore fear and the role it currently plays within your teaching practice aimed to
disrupt cis-heteronormativity.
○ Reflect on their experience in the program

Critical Reflection Prompt/s
● What have you learned about yourself and your teaching practice throughout the three
month program? What role does fear now play in disrupting cis-heteronormativity, if at
all?

Agenda (2 hour session)
● 15 Minutes
202

○ Acknowledgements
○ Meditative Check Ins
○ Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Agenda Overview
● 45 Minutes
○ The Man Enough Podcast-Alok: The Urgent Need for Compassion Video and
Discussion
● 25 Minutes
○ Video Debrief
● 5 Minute BREAK
● 30 Minutes
○ Critical Reflection and Discussion
○ Closing
Activities
● 1 min- Acknowledgements
○ Begin every session by saying/reading, “We start this session honoring the legacy
of trans, queer, gender non-conforming BIPOC who fought have continue to fight
for liberation of all people. We honor their work and continue their legacy.”
● 10 mins- Meditative Check In
○ Have participants share the following information
■ In this moment, what are you grateful for?
● 2 minutes-Assumptions and Guidelines Review
○ Review assumptions and guidelines:
■ We can’t promise safety in this space, but we can create a space that
promotes courageous discourse
■ We center consent-based practices, participating in ways that feel
comfortable and are accessible to our abilities and needs
■ We address behaviors, ideas, and choices knowing that we are capable of
change and growth
■ There is a wealth of information and experience in this group AND
everyone has immanent value
■ We honor and validate feelings and somatic experiences as they arise
during the group sessions.
■ *And any additional created by the group
○ Quick Share: How did we do? since it’s the last session?
● 2 minutes-Agenda Overview
○ Go over the agenda for the day and answer any questions the group may have
before you move on to the following activities.
● 45 minutes- The Man Enough Podcast-Alok: The Urgent Need for Compassion Video
203

○ Intro script: “We are going to explore the ideas of action and compassion through
this brilliant podcast. We will watch four clips from this video, silently reflect
between clips, and then discuss.”
○ After showing each clip, have participants write a quick reflection for 3-5
minutes.
■ Clip 1: 6:04-12:56
■ Clip 2: 24:13-29:27
■ Clip 3: 43:04-52:13
■ Clip 4: 52:58-57:34
● 25 minutes- Video Debrief
○ In pairs, have participants share their reflections and thoughts from the video.
After 10 minutes, have teachers return to participate in a whole group debrief.
● 5 minutes- Break
● 30 minutes- Critical Reflection and Discussion
○ Give teachers 15 minutes to write, answering the prompt: What have you learned
about yourself and your teaching practice throughout the three month program?
What role does fear now play in disrupting cis-heteronormativity, if at all?
○ Have teachers share their reflection, and guide their discussion to expand and go
deeper.
○ Closing:
■ Share quote to end the session: “It is in collectivities that we find
reservoirs of hope and optimism” -Angela Davis
■ Thank participants for participating, say final words, and say goodbye.
Resources:
● The Man Enough Podcast-Alok: The Urgent Need for Compassion YouTube Video Link
● Session Google Slides: Link to slides

204

Appendix F: Understanding by Design Planning Tool
UBD PLANNING TEMPLATE
Stage 1- Desired Results
Title of Unit:

Unit Goals (based on HILL Model)
Identity (How will your
teaching help students to
learn something about
themselves and or
others?)
• Students will...
Skill (What skills and content learning standards are you teaching?)
• English Language Arts
o Students will…
• Math
o Students will…
• Social Studies
o Students will…
• Science
o Students will…
Intellect (What will your
students become smarter
about?)
• Students will…

Criticality (How will you engage your thinking about power, equity, and anti-
oppression in the text, society, and in the world?)
• Students will...
Stage 2- Assessment Evidence
Performance Tasks:

Other Evidence:
Stage 3- Learning Plan
Unit Length:

ELA
• Week 1: Students
will...
Math
• Week 1: Students will...
• Week 2: Students will...
205

• Week 2: Students
will...
• Week 3: Students
will...
• Week 4: Students
will...
• Week 5: Students
will...
• Week 6: Students
will...
• Week 3: Students will...
• Week 4: Students will...
• Week 5: Students will...
• Week 6: Students will...
Social Studies
• Week 1: Students
will...
• Week 2: Students
will...
• Week 3: Students
will...
• Week 4: Students
will...
• Week 5: Students
will...
• Week 6: Students
will...
Science
• Week 1: Students will...
• Week 2: Students will...
• Week 3: Students will...
• Week 4: Students will...
• Week 5: Students will...
• Week 6: Students will...
Layered Text (what texts/media/resources/supplemental curriculum will you use throughout the unit?)

Stage 4- Lesson Plan Template
Name of Lesson: Length of Lesson:
Learning Goals:
• Identities:
• Skills:
• Intellect:
• Criticality:
Layered Text (list the
selected texts/media you
have chosen to support
student learning.
Attach/link copies if able)

Vocabulary and Concepts (include the central vocabulary words and
concepts)
Student Spark (State
how the teacher will get
students excited and
Body of Lesson (Write out an overview of the entire lesson plan)
206

engaged in the learning to
come. This is an
opportunity to include
multimodal text and
critical questions. This
should only be about 5-7
minutes)

Closure (State what the
teacher will do to close
the lesson)

Assessment (For each learning goal, write out how each will be assessed)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this action research study was to examine how I, as an instructional coach, support teachers to reflect on their positionality and teaching practices in order to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity and create safe and affirming conditions in their classroom. I created a six-session three-month small coaching group to help teachers to learn to use critical reflection and rational discourse as strategies to process their positionality and teaching practices. This study took place at HCNS, a K-8 charter school in Los Angeles that serves Black and Latinx students, via Zoom due to Covid-19. The research question guiding this action research study was: How do I coach teachers to reflect on their positionalities and teaching practices and to work towards disrupting cis-heteronormativity by producing safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students in their classroom? My conceptual framework, grounded in transformative adult learning theories and critical social theories, informed the development, implementation, and revision of a small group coaching program. Through critical reflections, observational field notes, interviews, and artifacts, I was able to collect data and analyze my practice. My findings discussed, show a need for coaches to address fear and differentiate based on knowledge and experience. My findings also showcase my areas of growth as a coach and leader. At the end of the study, based on findings, I created an instructional guide for coaches to use within the context of their professional work.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Cultivating critical reflection: an action research study on teaching and supporting district intern participants through critical reflection

PDF

Critically reflective dialogue: an action research study on increasing the critical consciousness of ethnic studies teachers

PDF

Critical pedagogy for music education: cultivating teachers’ critical consciousness through critically reflective inquiry

PDF

Instructional coaching: disrupting traditional math practices through inquiry and action research

PDF

Decolonizing the classroom: moving from reflection to critical reflection

PDF

Elementary teachers’ perceptions of gender identity and sexuality and how they are revealed in their pedagogical and curricular choices: two case studies

PDF

Using critical reflection to counter and disrupt deficit-based assumptions

PDF

Critical discourse: enacting asset orientations that disrupt dominant ideologies

PDF

Coaching to transform: an action research study on utilizing critical reflection to enact change towards incorporating culturally responsive teaching practices

PDF

Noticing identity: a critically reflective cycle to leverage student mathematical funds of knowledge and identity

PDF

Turning toward practice: establishing group reflective practice among upper elementary educators

PDF

Challenging dominant ideologies through sociopolitical discourse: an action research study on creating change as a history teacher

PDF

Cultivating a community of practice: an action research study on cultivating a community of practice that engages in trauma-informed dialogue and critical reflection

PDF

Queer consciousness: one kindergarten teacher’s action research to support colleagues in creating safer schools for queer people

PDF

Transformative learning: action research disrupting the status quo in literature in classrooms

PDF

Towards critical dialogue: an action research project building an awareness of an administrative team member’s role, identity, and deficit thinking

PDF

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

PDF

Pre-service teacher educator perceptions on preparing novice teachers for high quality teaching of K–12 students

PDF

Towards ideological clarity: an action research project on the role of a teacher in unearthing unconscious bias to embrace culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Changing the story: an action research study on utilizing culturally relevant pedagogical practice to enact a movement toward liberatory curriculum and instruction

Asset Metadata

Creator Traylor, Mary Erin (author)

Core Title Disrupting cis-heteronormativity: creating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students through a critical reflection coaching group

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2021-12

Publication Date 10/08/2021

Defense Date 08/24/2021

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

Tag critical reflection,educational coaching,inclusive classrooms,LGBTQ,OAI-PMH Harvest,teacher preparation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Samkian, Artineh (committee chair), Pascarella, John (committee member), Slayton, Julie (committee member)

Creator Email metraylo@usc.edu,mtraylor85@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC16022635

Unique identifier UC16022635

Legacy Identifier etd-TraylorMar-10143

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Traylor, Mary Erin

Type texts

Source 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