University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Gay straight alliances: A case study of member perceptions of support at an international school

(USC Thesis Other)

Gay straight alliances: A case study of member perceptions of support at an international school

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

GAY STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY OF MEMBER PERCEPTIONS OF
SUPPORT AT AN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL

by

Robin Foster Pearson

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2018

Copyright 2018 Robin Foster Pearson
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

ii
DEDICATION

For my family, especially my mother and late father, who have loved and supported me
no matter what and, to my loving partner, Ong Su Loon, who is a tower of strength. Finally, to
all the people in the world, who always felt a little different.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

iii
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I must thank my family and my life partner because without their love
and support, this body of work would never have been possible. Their patience and words of
loving encouragement kept me going, especially when I doubted myself and my ability to
complete this degree.
I must also acknowledge the guidance and support of my chair, Dr. Ruth Chang, as well
as my two-committee members, Dr. Laurence Picus and Dr. Mary Andres. Their advice,
comments, and experience have gently guided me along this journey. I must also recognize the
invaluable input from all my University of Southern California (U.S.C.) lecturers during the
coursework component of this degree. Every paper, every presentation and every word of advice
has culminated in this final dissertation. A special note must go to Dr. Darnell Cole, the
Associate Professor of Education at U.S.C. since he taught the diversity course, which was the
inspiration for this dissertation topic, and allowed me to learn more about what diversity and
inclusion truly means.
I want to thank and acknowledge all the members of the cohort, who travelled on this
special journey. The laughs, the instagram posts, the hugs, the popcorn, but more importantly,
the impressive wealth of experience and knowledge was truly inspirational. Not that I have
favorites, but a special mention has to go to Lisa Wan, my very best friend and colleague. She
certainly lifted my spirits during some dark moments.
I want to acknowledge the school, which made all of this possible. To Jennifer Sparrow,
who was on the cohort but whom also helped us all enormously; I want to add a special thank
you. To my working colleagues, my administrative team, and the students I work with; all of
these people have contributed to my knowledge in some way.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

iv
A special thanks must go to those who gave their time to this study. This includes the
members of the alliance, who gave their time during my presentations and made me feel
especially welcome. I applaud you all, since such clubs never existed when I was at school. I
must also thank the faculty advisor, who guided and steered me through out this process and
whose dedication to their role is highly commendable.
A final mention must go to all those people I have interacted with, that have inadvertently
shaped and molded my own worldview. From my early days as a phone counselor at
Oogachaga, to interactions with people at events such as Pink Dot, all have helped me develop a
deeper understanding of life and have had a profound effect upon me.
I am grateful to qualitative research and those behind the voices in this study. I merely
add one caveat, which are any errors in this dissertation are my own. I end this acknowledgment
with the lyrics to a song by Kylie Minogue, which gave me inspiration during the final phases of
this dissertation and whose lyrics capture the essence of the human element of this study and a
need for everyone to belong.
I know what you were feeling
When you played me that song
Gave every word meaning
You showed me a place we belonged

Robin Pearson
May, 2018

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

v
Table of Contents
List of Tables vi
Abstract vii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 1
Schools: A Safe Haven For All Students 1
The Importance of Diversity Representation in Schools 2
Purpose of Inquiry 7
Conceptual framework 8
Importance of the Study 10
Limitations and Delimitations 11
Definitions 13
Chapter Two: Literature Review 15
Background on Gay-Straight Alliances 15
The Importance of Visibility and Inclusion 17
Sexual Minorities and the Singapore Context 19
Gay-Straight Alliances: Form And Function 24
Gay-Straight Alliances: The Benefits 28
Gay-Straight Alliances: The Challenges 35
Summary 38
Purpose of the Study 40
Chapter Three: Methodology 42
Participants and Sampling Rationale 42
Instruments 45
Credibility and Trustworthiness 48
Data Analytic Strategy 49
Chapter Four: Findings 51
Research Question 1: What perceptions do students, who
participate in the Gay-Straight Alliance club (GSA), have of
the support systems at The International School of East Asia? 52

Research Question 2: How do members of the GSA feel about
the role the alliance plays in helping them succeed in their academic
and social-emotional well-being? 57

Research Question 3: What other kinds of support services would
members of the GSA like to see at their school? 69
Summary 78
Chapter Five: Discussion 80
Summary of Findings 80
Implications 86
Recommendations for Future Research 90
Conclusion 92
References 94
Appendix A: Final Interview Protocol 106
Appendix B: Interview Questions 108
Appendix C: Email text sent to participants upon receiving signed consent 109
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

vi
List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Profile Information 1, 44
Table 2: Participant Roles 45

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

vii
Abstract
Schools present unique opportunities to foster and improve belonging for all students.
Meaningful inclusion requires visible and equal representation as well as safe environments
(Cerezo and Bergfield, 2013; Sadowski, 2016). Students who may be lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender or questioning (LGBTQ) deserve equal attention in educational models which seek
to be inclusive and acknowledge diverse student populations in schools. Key studies from the
United States indicate there is much to be done, suggesting LBGTQ students often do not feel
safe or visible in schools (Kosciw, Greytak, Giga, Villenas & Danischewski, 2016). School
based resources, however, such as student led clubs known as Gay-Straight Alliances, are
helping to address the needs of LGBTQ students. The purpose of this study was to gain an
understanding of a group of LGBTQ students who attend an international school in Asia and
who are all regular members of a Gay-Straight Alliance. It aimed to gain a better understanding
of their school experience in terms of support systems and structures through the unique lens of
an international school. A qualitative research design was implemented through the use of semi-
structured interviews with four participants, who voluntarily took part in the study. Seven
themes emerged from the study, (1) formal support systems are perceived to be secondary to peer
support, (2) less formal support services such as friends and peers carry a higher level of trust,
(3) the Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) is the primary, most visible, safe space, (4) outreach beyond
the GSA is limited, (5) existing barriers prohibit inclusive practices for LGBTQ students, (6)
LGBTQ educational programs would help raise awareness, and (7) There is a need to create and
implement school policies, which are more inclusive and will better protect LGBTQ students at
the school. Implications of this study entail specialized training for counselors, outreach beyond
the confines of the GSA, inclusive policies and targeted LGBTQ educational programs.
Running head: GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY 1
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Schools: A Safe Haven For All Students
A school’s mission is to ensure all students learn. A student’s educational experience,
however, encompasses not only the academic but also their social and emotional development.
Sadowski (2016) states that few educators would argue that a school’s purpose is to ensure the
safety of all students. However, what conditions must be met in order for a student to feel safe?
Twemlow, Fonagy and Sacco (2002) state that for a child to feel safe and to learn at school, a set
number of psychological conditions must be met. Using concepts from psychoanalytic research,
they report that safety requires well-being, adults who can respond to a student’s development
needs, an environment that provides containment allowing children to process the social and
emotional, and finally, supports that encourage students to function in a community organized as
an open social system (Twemlow, Fonagy & Sacco, 2002). When one considers that amount of
time students spend at school, it is vital that educational settings guarantee not only the safety of
all students but also foster a sense of belonging.
Schools present unique opportunities to foster and improve belonging for all students. In
a meta-analysis of individual and social level factors that influence school belonging, Allen,
Kern, Vella-Brodrick, Hattie and Waters (2016) identified 10 themes that influence school
belonging during the adolescence phase of school. These themes included areas such as peer
support, teacher support, emotional stability and environmental/school safety. The researchers
in this study meta-analytically examined associations between each of the 10 themes and school
belonging across 51 studies (N = 67,378). Their findings revealed that teacher support and
positive personal characteristic were the strongest predictors of school belonging. Optimism
and self-esteem are prime examples of positive personal characteristics (Allen et al, 2016). This
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

2
study suggests that support and the role teachers’ play are important components for fostering a
sense of belonging and nurturing student well being.
The Importance of Diversity Representation in Schools
Diversity issues in schools also played a prevalent role. In the United States, unequal
access to educational resources in terms of race has greatly affected student achievement, leading
to widening gap in educational opportunities (see Darling-Hammond, 2007). Diversity and
belongingness are intertwined. Walton and Cohen (2007) use the term belonging uncertainty, a
state in which, “stigmatization can create a global uncertainty about the quality of one’s social
bonds in academic and professional domains” (p. 94). Their study on Black students suggested
that when these students were led to believe they had few friends in a subject, their sense of fit
and potential fell. Meaningful inclusion therefore requires visible and equal representation as
well as safe environments (Cerezo & Bergfield, 2013).
In terms of ethnicity, American international schools often have diverse student
populations
1
. Murakami-Ramalho (2008) highlights the importance of practices of leadership
towards diversity in a study on American international schools. This qualitative study examined
the experiences of 23 educators working in international school settings. The study addressed
how these teachers addressed their contextual and cultural experiences and whether concepts of
diversity changed as a result of international school experience. Findings from this study
suggested educators valued the overseas experience and had developed new perspectives and
practices as a result of working in an international school setting.

1
The school site used in this study is a prime example of such an international school. Data
collected during the 2013-14 school year, revealed that while the majority of students were from
one country, around 14% of students held a second passport. The remaining 30% of students had
passports from an East Asian country (9%), Singapore (5%), another Southeast Asian country
(4%), a Southern Asian country (5%) or one of a variety of other countries (8%) (this reference
has not been cited to protect the identity of the school).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

3
Orientation diversity: A focus on LGBTQ populations
Diversity is more than race, ethnicity and cultural identity. Students who may be lesbian,
gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning (LGBTQ
2
) deserve equal attention in educational
models which seek to be inclusive and acknowledge diverse student populations in schools.
Cerezo and Bergfield (2013) suggest schools use lessons learned in applying the use of critical
race theory (CRT), having LGBTQ representation in key areas and creating counterspaces. Rich
data from the United States addresses why it is important for schools to focus on support for this
subset of students. For students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning
(LGBTQ) students, safety continues to be a primary concern. Sadowski (2016) poses the
question; what does ‘safe’ mean for LGBTQ students and what would be the essential
components of safety for these students in schools?
The Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), is an organization founded
in 1990 in the United States. It seeks to end discrimination, harassment, and bullying based
on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression in K-12 schools. Every two years,
GLSEN conducts the National School Climate Survey (NSCS) to gather data on school
experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning (LGBTQ) students. The final
sample from the 2015 NCSS consisted of over 10,528 students between the ages of 13 and 21.
Students were from all 50 states, from 3,095 unique school districts. The sample included
students ranging from grades 6 to 12, with the largest numbers in grades 10 and 11.
Approximately two-thirds of the sample (68.6%) was White, a third (34.9%) was cisgender

2
For the purposes of this paper, the term LGBTQ will be used. This is defined as lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender and questioning. When referencing other studies, the original terminology
employed will be maintained to respect different variables. For general discussion, LGBTQ will
be used.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

4
female, and about half identified as gay or lesbian (49.2%) (Kosciw, Greytak, Giga, Villenas &
Danischewski, 2016).
The 2015 National School Climate Survey documents progress in the improving lives of
LGBTQ students in many educational settings throughout the United States, highlighting the
success of the presence of school-based interventions that “promote inclusive and affirming
learning environments” (Kosciw et al., 2016, p. xi,). The 2015 NSCS reported a decrease in
homophobic remarks compared to prior years as well as a reduction in the incidence of verbal
and physical harassment and physical assault based on sexual orientation or gender expression
(Kosciw et al., 2016).
LGBTQ youth and schools in the United States
Despite these improvements, key findings still indicate schools continue to be hostile
environments for LGBTQ youth in the United States (Kosciw, Palmer, Kull & Greytak, 2013;
Kosciw et al., 2016; Toomey & Russell, 2016). Kosciw, Palmer, Kull, and Greytak (2013)
analyzed data from secondary schools in the United States, which examined the experiences of
LGBT students. The final sample included 5,730 youth with about two thirds of the participants
identifying as white and more than half of the sample self-identified as female. Over 91% of the
participants attended public schools with a mix of urban, suburban and rural schools. Findings
from structural equation modeling showed that victimization of LGBT youth contributed to
lower academic outcomes and lower self-esteem.
In schools in the United States, LGBTQ students often do not feel safe. In the 2015
National School Climate survey, over half of the students surveyed (57.6%) felt unsafe at school
because of their sexual orientation, and 43.3% because of their gender expression. Just over 31%
of students missed at least one day of school in the past month because they felt unsafe (Kosciw
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

5
et al., 2016). The survey also reports high rates of homophobic and trans phobic harassment
within schools in the United States. The vast majority of LGBTQ students (85.2%) experienced
verbal harassment (name calling or being threatened) with 27% being physically assaulted
(pushed or shoved) and 13% being physically assaulted (e.g., punched, kicked, injured with a
weapon) in the past year because of their sexual orientation. Almost all of LGBTQ students
(98.1%) heard “gay” used in a negative way (e.g., “that’s so gay”) at school with 67.4% hearing
these remarks frequently or often, and 93.4% reported that they felt distressed because of this
language. Verbal harassment was also reported being heard from adults at school with 56.2% of
students reporting hearing homophobic remarks from teachers or staff and 63.5% of students
reported hearing negative remarks about gender expression from teachers or other school staff.
In terms of discriminatory school polices and practices, 66.2% of LGBTQ students reported
personally experiencing any LGBT related discriminatory policies or practices at school.
Students had reported being disciplined for public displays of affection (29.8%). Transgender
students (50.9%) reported that they had been prevented from using their preferred name or
pronoun (Kosciw et al., 2016).
School-based victimization is associated with poorer developmental, academic, and
health outcomes. Toomey and Russell’s (2016) meta-analytic review, which examined results
from 18 independent studies (N = 56,752 participants) suggest that sexual minority youth
experience moderately higher levels of school-based victimization compared to heterosexual
youth (d = 0.33). This is a concerning disparity considering a school’s purpose is to keep all
students safe. This study also suggests sexual minority males may be at more of a heightened
risk for school-based victimization (Toomey & Russell, 2016).

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

6
School based resources for LGBTQ youth
School initiatives, which provide targeted interventions aimed at closing this disparity,
have been shown to be effective. The GLSEN National School Climate Survey has been
conducted biannually since 1999. The survey indicates some positive trends, notably a reduction
in the number verbal and physical harassment and physical assault incidents, based on sexual
orientation or gender expression. This demonstrates the importance of school-based resources,
which support LGBTQ students in schools. The 2015 National School Climate Survey stated,
“increases in the availability of many LGBT-related resources may be having a positive effect on
the school environment” (Kosciw et al., 2016, p. xxii). This reduction is testimony to the
important role schools can play in the well-being of LGBTQ students.
The availability of LGBTQ-related support resources in schools are even more important
when the home environment may not be safe or supportive. For those LGBTQ students who
may be the victims of bullying or abuse, many may not be able to expect support from their
families, since many LGBTQ students are afraid to tell their families they are or might be
LGBTQ (Macgillivray, 2007). In a study on the role of family acceptance as a protective factor
for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) adolescents and young adults, Ryan, Russell,
Huebner, Diaz and Sanchez, (2010) found that family acceptance of LGBT adolescents is
associated with positive young adult mental and physical health. The study also found that
interventions that promote parental and caregiver acceptance of LGBT adolescents are needed to
reduce health disparities. Should this family support be absent, the role a school can play in
LGBTQ student well-being becomes increasingly important.
Macgillivray (2007) states that the need for support for LGBTQ youth, places the role of
school support as being pivotal to health and well-being of students who are or may be LGBTQ.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

7
Gay-Straight Alliances (GSA) is one example of such support in schools. They provide safe
spaces for students to “develop their social skills, get support and information that is age-
appropriate, and meet others with similar interests, which helps end the social and emotional
isolation some LGBT teens experience” (Macgillivray, 2007, p.7). It is crucial for schools to
therefore understand how a GSA can create a safe environment for LGBTQ students and are
there other functions a GSA can provide to ensure these students thrive.
Purpose of Inquiry
The International School of East Asia (ISEA) is an international school serving the
expatriate community in Singapore. The school’s mission statement aims to provide all students
with a high standard of education. ISEA also offers a variety of social clubs, at both the middle
and secondary education level. These clubs aim to further enrich student learning and interests.
A Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) is one example of the many social clubs students may choose to
participate in. The GSA, which is the focus of inquiry for this study, aims to raise awareness,
promote basic human rights and provide support. The club has a very open door policy and
welcomes all students.
While a Gay-Straight Alliance exists at The International School of East Asia (ISEA),
there is a need to better understand the perceptions of the members of this GSA. The club
welcomes students who may be lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning (LGBTQ) as
well as their straight allies. Through better understanding of the perceptions of LGBTQ students
and their straight allies, ISEA will be able to better serve this group of students within the school
community and at other international schools. This understanding will also guide ISEA in
developing appropriate support systems and structures, which may target specific LGBTQ
interventions, should a need be identified. Better understanding the perceptions of LGBTQ
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

8
students and their straight allies may also assist ISEA to deliver upon the school’s commitment
to provide a safe school environment for all members of the school community and to deliver on
the school’s mission of providing all students with a high standard of education.
The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of the needs of a subset of
students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning. The study explored the
perceptions of those students who participate in a Gay-Straight Alliance at The International
School of East Asia (ISEA). This study aimed to gain a better understanding of their school
experience in terms of support systems and structures. Understanding LGBTQ students and their
perceptions at this school can help guide and shape the school’s ability to not only create safe
environments for all members of the community, but to also achieve what Sadowski (2016)
states is the need to “affirm LGBTQ students and integrate respect for LGBTQ identities through
multiple aspects of school life” (p. 9).
The specific research questions that elaborate the research purpose were:
1. What perceptions do students, who participate in the Gay-Straight Alliance
club (GSA), have of the support systems at The International School of East Asia?
2. How do members of the GSA feel about the role the alliance plays in helping them
succeed in their academic and social-emotional well-being?
3. What other kinds of support services would members of the GSA like to see at their
school?
Conceptual Framework
The importance of visibility, the creation of visible spaces and inclusion will be central to
this study (Cerezo & Bergfield, 2013; Grayson, 1987; Meyer, 2007; Tierney, 1997; Tierney &
Dilley, 1998). The aim is to understand how members perceive the role of the GSA in opening
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

9
up opportunities for visible spaces. Conversely, it is important to explore whether members also
perceive if certain barriers exist, either within the GSA or through other support systems and
structures at the school. The study will examine whether members perceive elements of Friend’s
(1993) concept of systematic inclusion and exclusion to be present in their school experience at
The International School of East Asia and whether being a member of a Gay-Straight Alliance is
able to counteract these elements. To build on this, stress processes from Meyer’s minority
stress model (2003), such as experiences of prejudice, expectations of rejection, hiding and
concealment and internalized homophobia and ameliorative coping processes will be explored to
see whether, first, members experience such processes and, second, whether the GSA and other
support systems are perceived to act as a buffer against them. Kwon’s (2013) theoretical
framework of resilience for LGB individuals will also inform this study. In order to lower
reactivity to prejudice (which in turn aids psychological health), social support can provide a
buffer to prejudice and lead to better well-being. Emotional openness and hope/optimism for the
future are also seen as additional factors in building resilience for LGB individuals. These
frameworks will help guide and inform this study in examining member perceptions of support,
in order to gain a better understanding of student experience.
Since the presence of a Gay-Straight Alliance can lead to LGBTQ youth experiencing
safer, more positive school environments (Kosciw et al., 2016), this study will examine the
concept of safety utilizing Fetner, Elafros, Bortolin and Drechsler’s (2012) conceptual
framework of safe spaces
3
. Fetner et al., (2012) created three questions, which target context,
membership inclusivity or exclusivity and finally, the relationship between safe spaces and what

3
This is based on Polletta’s (1999) sociological work to determine what are the qualities that
make a space safe (as cited in Fetner et al., 2012).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

10
occurs within that space. Placed into simple language, the questions are safe from what?; safe
from whom?; safe to do what?
Finally, Gay-Straight Alliances can also become a venue to advocate for change, both in
the school and the surrounding community (Kosciw et al., 2016). While several studies have
suggested GSAs may not challenge heteronormative norms, which underlie prejudice and
victimization (Griffin, Lee, Waugh & Beyer, 2004; Steck & Perry, 2016; Watson, Varjas,
Meyers & Graybill, 2010), this study aims to explore whether members of the GSA perceive
their club to be an advocate for change. Using Cerezo and Bergfield’s (2013) concepts of critical
race theory to create meaningful LGBTQ inclusion in schools, this study will explore how
members perceive issues such as diversity representation at The International School of East
Asia and whether they feel the GSA or other support systems provide opportunities to deeply
engage in what Friere (2000) has termed, critical consciousness.
Importance of the Study
The International School of East Asia is committed to diversity. The school has created a
community statement asserting the importance of difference. It emphasizes that it is the
responsibility of the school community to ensure all members are “valued, welcome, and treated
with dignity and respect”
4
.
The importance of this study is to contribute towards an understanding of the perceptions
LGBTQ students at The International School of East Asia in terms of their own social and
emotional well-being. It seeks to understand whether such students feel affirmed and respected.
This understanding can help better guide the school to design and implement appropriate support
systems and interventions for LGBTQ students at this school.

4
This reference has not been cited to protect the identity of the school.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

11
The study will also seek to gain insight into better understanding this subset of students
within the setting of an international school in Singapore. The geographic location of the school
is also important to this study. Multiple barriers to inclusivity and the recognition of sexual
diversity exist in the broader community of Singapore, which has led to a marginalization of
homosexuality (Obendorf, 2013). While visible spaces for LGBTQ exist in Singapore society
(Phillip, 2014; Yue, 2012), several studies have highlighted how homosexuality is a silenced
topic in Singaporean local schools (Chong, 2011; Lim, 2004; Obendorf, 2013). This study,
while set within an international school, would be a step toward providing insight into the
perspectives of students and LGBTQ issues, within the geographical context of Singapore.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study raises certain limitations in terms of generalizability, both internal and
external. The internal generalizability means that findings may not be able to be generalized
within the case (the chosen GSA) or setting of The International School of East Asia (Maxwell,
2013). This is due to the fact membership of the GSA is fluid, not all members may choose to
participate, and there will be LGBTQ students and allies who have chosen not to be a member of
the GSA. External generalizability means that the findings may not be able to be generalized
beyond the setting of The International School of East Asia, to other international schools, either
in Singapore or around the world (Maxwell, 2013).
The delimitations of this study are as follows. First, this study will only focus on
members of one particular Gay-Straight Alliance at The International School of East Asia. Since
other such social clubs do exist at the school, it will not include those students who participate in
other clubs. The study will also exclude those LGTBQ students or allies who do not participate
in any group, which aims to support the LGTBQ community. It will exclude the faculty advisor,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

12
since the study is only focusing on student perceptions of the GSA. Being a member of this
selected GSA at The International School of East Asia is a determining factor, therefore creating
boundaries in what is to be studied (Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). Within the selected Gay-
Straight Alliance, the study will also exclude those students who did not feel comfortable
seeking parental approval in order to participate in the study
5
.
Second, literature reviewed on LGBTQ educational issues and themes in schools in this
study, has predominantly focus on research from the United States, specifically in the context of
Gay-Straight Alliances. This is due to long history of such clubs in the United States (see
Miceli, 2005; Szalacha, 2003). The Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) is
also testimony to over 25 years of work, ensuring “that schools are safe and affirming spaces for
all students, regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression”
(Kosciw et al., 2016, p. 3). The GLSEN National School Climate Survey (NSCS), a national
biennial survey of LGBTQ middle and high school students, is now in its ninth edition, further
testimony to longitudinal studies on LGBTQ students in schools in the United States. Research
on sexual minorities in Singapore has been included, together with limited research on LGBTQ
issues in Singapore local schools. This study has excluded LGBTQ issues within the context of
Singapore’s higher educational institutions such as polytechnic colleges and universities.
This study will employ qualitative procedures. The goal of using this approach is to
maintain the qualities of the naturalistic setting (The International School of East Asia) and be as
detailed as possible (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). The study aims to understand the meaning
members of this Gay-Straight Alliance have constructed, how they make sense of their life both
at school and in Singapore and their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

5
The need for parental approval was a requirement laid out by the school.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

13
Definitions
The following is a summary of terms and their definitions, which have frequently been
used in this study:
• Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA): A GSA is a student led club, which is typically
overseen by what is termed a faculty advisor. The goal of a GSA to provide a
safe space for students to develop social skills, gain support and meet those with
similar interests (Macgillivray, 2007).
• The Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN): This is a national
education organization, which was established in 1990. The organization’s vision
statement is as follows, “GLSEN envisions a world in which every child learns to
respect and accept all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender
identity/expression. GLSEN seeks to develop school climates where difference is
valued for the positive contribution it makes to creating a more vibrant and
diverse community” (Kosciw et al., 2016)
• Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning (LGBTQ): This paper will use
the term LGBTQ to define students who are or may be lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender or questioning. LGBTIQ is defined as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,
Transgender, Intersex, Queer (Definition of Terms| Centers for Educational
Justice & Community Engagement. (2016).
• Local schools: the term local schools denotes those schools, which do not fall
under the category of the Foreign Systems Schools (FSS) in Singapore and
primarily cater to Singaporean citizens. FSS schools are more commonly termed
‘international schools’. FSS, “are intended to primarily cater to the community of
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

14
expatriates’ children in Singapore, Singapore Citizens who wish to enrol in FSS
(excluding pre-school) would require MOE’s approval to do so” (Ministry of
Education, Singapore/Foreign Systems Schools, n.d.).
• Sexual minorities: Refers to members of sexual orientations or who engage in
sexual activities that are not part of the mainstream (Definition of Terms| Centers
for Educational Justice & Community Engagement, 2016).

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

15
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
In this chapter, I provide a general overview of the history and purpose of student led
clubs known as Gay-Straight Alliances. The need for visible, inclusive practices is discussed,
highlighting the important role Gay-Straight Alliances can play in providing counter spaces.
Considering the geographical location of The International School of East Asia, I have provided
some background to the national context of Singapore and sexual diversity, with an overview of
the extremely limited literature on LGBTQ issues within the Singaporean education system.
Gay-Straight Alliances, from an American context, will then be examined through the
following key themes. First, what are the common, most effectives components of a Gay-
Straight Alliance (GSA)? Second, what are the core benefits of a GSA? Third, what challenges,
if any, do Gay-Straight Alliances present to schools? Although Gay-Straight Alliances have a
rich history in the United States, such student-based clubs do present a number of unique
challenges. A final discussion will focus on whether GSAs challenge the very heteronormative
practices, which often underlie prejudice against LGBTQ youth in schools.
Background on Gay-Straight Alliances
Gay-Straight Alliances (GSA) can provide safe spaces for LGBTQ students and their
straight allies, providing opportunities to socialize and feel supported. A GSA can also become a
venue to advocate for change, both in the school and the surrounding community (Kosciw et al.,
2016). Historically, Gay-Straight Alliances can be traced to the early 1990’s in the United
States. Project 10, in Los Angeles, was the nation’s first public school program aimed at
providing educational support services to LGBTQ youth. The Massachusetts Board of
Education established the Safe Schools program for gay and lesbian students with a goal of
protecting LGBTQ students from harassment, violence and discrimination, to provide training
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

16
for schools and to support the establishment of school-based support groups known as Gay-
Straight Alliances (Szalacha, 2003). Miceli (2005) provides a comprehensive historical review
of early support systems in schools for LGBTQ youth.
A key finding in the 2015 National School Climate Survey was that LGBTQ students
experienced a safer, more positive school environment when their school had a GSA (Kosciw et
al., 2016). Marx and Kettrey’s (2016) meta-analysis evaluated the association between school
GSA presence and youth’s self-reports of school-based victimization by quantitatively
synthesizing 15 primary studies with 62,923 participants. Their findings indicate GSA presence
is associated with significantly lower levels of student self-reports of homophobic victimization,
fear for safety, and hearing homophobic remarks. Comparisons between schools that have a
GSA and those that do not, indicate LGBTQ students are less likely to hear homophobic
language, feel safer, and feel a strong sense of connectedness to their school community than
those schools that lack a GSA (Kosciw et al., 2016).
The presence of GSAs in schools in the United States is growing
6
. The 2015 National
School Climate Survey (NSCS) found that over half (54%) of students reported the presence of a
GSA or similar student club. While GSAs may be available in schools, LGBTQ participation,
however, is not guaranteed. The 2015 NSCS indicated that while most LGBTQ students
reported participation in their GSA to some degree, more than a third (34%), reported no
participation (Kosciw et al., 2016).

6
The 2015 National Climate Survey (NCS) has tracked the availability of Gay-Straight Alliances
over time. The data indicates that there has been a significant increase in the percentage of
LGBTQ students reporting the presence of a GSA at their school (Kosciw et al., 2016). The
2015 NCS found those students reporting they had a GSA, “has increased from about 40% in
2007 to nearly 60% in 2015. Considering the NCS’s large sample size of over 10,000 students
covering 50 states and more than 3000 school districts, this data provides sound evidence of a
sustained growth of Gay-Straight Alliances in schools in the United States.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

17
Gay-Straight Alliances, therefore, are playing a strong role in schools in the United States
in providing support to LGBTQ students. They provide a safe space for such students and can
provide a buffer again the negative effects of school-based harassment and victimization.
Whether a GSA can provide support for all LGBTQ students within a school is questionable
since participation cannot be guaranteed. Understanding how a GSA functions within a school is
one important step towards providing the best support possible for LGBTQ students.
The Importance of Visibility and Inclusion
The need for visible spaces is an important factor when considering equity issues for
LGBTQ students. When institutions ignore the needs of their LGBTQ population, this may
result in exclusion and invisibility (Grayson, 1987; Tierney, 1997; Tierney & Dilley, 1998;
Meyer, 2007). Exclusion and invisibility can lead to the development of coping mechanisms as a
result of marginalization and the negative effects of a hostile school environment (Grossman,
Haney, Edwards, Alessi, Ardon & Howell, 2009).
Grayson (1987) states, “exclusion and invisibility have been major means by which
educators have institutionalized and maintained prejudice and discrimination against lesbians and
gay males” (p. 138). Researchers have lamented how the invisibility of a group can reinforce
prejudice (Tierney, 1997; Tierney & Dilley, 1998). Meyer (2007) states school structures
mandate heterosexual norms through curriculum and cultural norms and calls for a
transformation of schools via queer pedagogy.
Systematic Exclusion and Inclusion
Invisibility or the silencing of LGBTQ issues has been conceptualized into what has been
termed systematic exclusion and inclusion. Friend (1993) states, “systematic exclusion is the
process whereby positive role models, messages, and images about lesbian, gay, and bisexual
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

18
people are publicly silenced in schools” (p. 212). An example of systematic exclusion would be
when educators fail to intervene and provide protection from peer harassment. Data from the
2015 National School Climate Survey reveals that the majority of LGBTQ students often do not
report incidents of school-based harassment either because they doubt an effective intervention
will occur or for fear it may make the situation worse (Kosciw et al., 2016). Systematic
inclusion is the process whereby heterosexism in schools is institutionalized. Friend states,
“when discussions regarding homosexuality do occur, they are consistently placed in a negative
context. This results in the systematic inclusion of conversations about homosexuality only as
pathology, only in regard to sexual behavior and/or framed as dangerous” (p. 215). The positive
representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender is therefore publicly silenced. The
invisibility and exclusion of LGBTQ issues present numerous challenges for schools in terms of
equity and sexual diversity.
The effects of exclusionary, hostile environments upon LGBTQ youth can lead to the
development of coping mechanisms, which further emphasize exclusion and invisibility.
Grossman, Haney, Edwards, Alessi, Ardon and Howell (2009) conducted a qualitative study
using five focus groups of LGBT youth attending public high schools to examine their
experiences with school violence. The study consisted of 31 sexual minority youth, ages 15-19,
from 21 New York City public high schools. The two themes, which emerged from this
descriptive study, suggest that LGBT students feel a lack of community as well as a lack of
empowerment (Grossman et al., 2009). As a result of a lack of belonging, some participants
withdrew from situations where they felt unsafe. One participant “stayed out of school for three
months before finding a different school that was more gay-friendly” (Grossman et al., 2009, p.
35). While these findings cannot be generalized to all LGBTQ youth, this study provides an
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

19
understanding of LGBTQ students when faced with hostility. Lack of schools days has been
identified as a trend in the GLSEN 2015 National School Climate Survey when LGBTQ students
experience higher levels of victimization either due to sexual orientation or gender expression
2015 National School Climate Survey (Kosciw et al., 2016, p. xxii).
The need to create visible spaces, to include and recognize all students, regardless of
sexual orientation or gender expression, is important. When LGBTQ youth are marginalized and
excluded, it reinforces prejudice and established norms. This results in the silencing of LGBTQ
members of a school community. Supportive student clubs such as Gay-Straight Alliances
(GSA) are one example of how schools can help in creating more positive environments for
LGBTQ students. GSAs not only provide safe spaces for LGBTQ students but they may also
help contribute to a more respectful school environment, contributing to a safer and more
inclusive school (Kosciw et al., 2016). Taking into account the positive contributions GSAs may
bring to a school community, the following section provides insight into how sexual diversity is
addressed in Singapore and Singaporean schools. It highlights the complexity of LGBTQ issues,
in regards to visibility, inclusion and the education system in Singapore.
Sexual Minorities and the Singapore Context
In order to provide the national context in which the International School of East Asia
operates, I provide in this section an overview of Singapore’s policy on sexual minorities,
particularly relating to homosexuality and how this particularly affects men who may be gay,
bisexual or questioning. Additionally, I provide an overview of the extremely limited literature
on LGBTQ issues within the Singaporean education system, specifically schools that provide
education to the broader population of Singapore. What literature is available seems to suggest
that Singapore local schools maintain a code of invisibility on the topic of sexual minorities.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

20
This invisibility appears to be reinforced by heteronormative values, crafted to align with moral
values seen to be unique to the Asian region.
Homosexuality and the Law
As an island state located in the heart of South East Asia, Singapore presents its own
unique set of challenges in area of sexual diversity. Some of these challenges have the potential
to severely impact the rights of those who may be gay, bisexual or questioning. Singapore is
among several countries in Asia, such as India and Malaysia, that legally prohibit male
homosexual activity based on law with British colonial origins (Detenber, Cenite, Zhou, Malik &
Neo, 2014). One primary barrier to inclusivity and the recognition of sexual diversity in
Singapore is the strong influence of such laws. Section 377a
7
of the penal code criminalizes sex
between mutually consenting men (Attorney-General of Singapore, n.d.). While the current
Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Hsien Loong, has recognized that homosexuals have a place in
Singapore society and are entitled to their private lives; appeals to s377a have been rejected for
fear of causing irreparable division within the nation (Phillips, 2014). The government seeks to
preserve s377a while simultaneously pledging not to enforce it. Such practices have been
interpreted as the Singapore government’s strategy of pragmatism, a practice of policy, which
avoids controversy and applies what is deemed best for the nation (Phillips, 2014).
For sexual minorities, Tierney (1997) suggests that invisibility has two aspects. First is
the avoidance of marking oneself as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Second, invisibility
can be impacted by heteronormative, dominant practices, which can render minority groups

7
Section 377a of the penal code of Singapore states, “any male person who, in public or private,
commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any
male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years’ (Attorney-General of Singapore, n.d.).

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

21
silent. Literature suggests this second aspect to be prevalent when it comes to recognition of
sexual minorities in Singapore’s local schools.
Sexual Diversity and Singapore Schools
When considering the legal barriers to inclusivity and the limited recognition of sexual
diversity in the broader community, educational institutions such as schools in Singapore face
further challenges. Several studies have highlighted how homosexuality is a silenced topic in
Singaporean schools (Chong, 2011; Lim, 2004; Obendorf, 2013).
Chong (2011) examines how historically education in Singapore has traditionally been
the vehicle for maintaining a moral code. The roots of education lay in the political leveraging
of morality by the ruling party, the People’s Action Party (PAP) that consciously constructed an
image of the ‘West’ as indulgent and that of Singapore, an Asian construct, of being the moral
ballast. Education programs of the early eighties were designed to produce citizens inculcated
with desired moral values and social attitudes (Chong, 2011). Other studies have also supported
the construct of a moral Asia set against a morally and culturally degenerate West (Lim, 2004;
Oswin, 2014; Tan & Lee, 2007). Strengthened by the discourse of Asian values, the
heterosexual family is central to what is morally acceptable. Non-heteronormative values lie
outside this norm and are often portrayed as unnatural and not in keeping with Asian, moral
values. Lim (2004) reports that Singapore employs statistics depicting societal opinion to
legitimize policies that prohibit the discussion of homosexuality in public spaces. Lim adds “sex
education in secondary schools and junior colleges provides nebulous definitions of
‘homosexuals’ and ‘homosexuality’, mainly emphasizing the downsides of this sexuality” (p.
1763).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

22
The Ministry of Education’s Framework for Sexuality Education in Singapore provides
some insight into how sexuality is address in local schools. The framework emphasizes the
importance of developing a moral compass, which places the family as the central unit.
Developing healthy and respectful relationships between married couples is key. The aim of the
program is to help students, “Develop a moral compass, respect for themselves and for others as
sexual beings, premised on the family as the basic unit of society, by having positive mainstream
values and attitudes about sexuality” (Ministry of Education, 2016). The framework strongly
suggests heteronormative values, testimony to the silence and marginalization of sexual
minorities.
Marginalization. Negative constructs of homosexuality in Singapore schools have been
found to lead to prejudice against students who identify as LGBT. A qualitative study, which
interviewed 25 lesbians in Singapore, found that some participants had contemplated suicide
because the school system did not address homosexuality in a positive light and did not provide
the environment with which to safely discuss LGBTQ issues (Soh as cited in Lim, 2004).
Alviar-Martin and Ho’s (2010) qualitative study on teacher perspectives of multi-cultural
education and diversity in Singapore revealed reluctance by Singaporean teachers to address
controversial issues or debate oppositional viewpoints in class. The study focuses on six
Singaporean teacher’ experiences of diversity. Two teachers expanded diversity beyond race
and ethnicity, to also include sexuality. Both teachers lamented the fact that homosexuality was
a taboo topic in Singapore. Alviar-Martin and Ho (2010) reported that these two participants
shared concerns about the discrimination faced by sexual minorities and “recognized the
importance of classroom teaching that included marginalized perspectives and contentious public
issues” (p. 133).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

23
Harassment and victimization. Oogachaga is a non-governmental organization in
Singapore, which provides support for citizens and residents in Singapore who may identify as
LGBTQ. In a joint report on human rights specific to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
questioning community in Singapore to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations,
Oogachaga included data from several surveys, which aimed to understand the impact of both
homophobia and transphobia.
Entitled the ‘Homophobia and Transphobia Survey 2012’ (HATS2012), the online
anonymous survey included responses from more than 450 responses. In regards to
homophobia, over 60% of the respondents reported past experiences of sexual orientation or
gender identity–based abuse and discrimination. In response to an item on sources of abuse and
discrimination, 65% of males (n=170) and 56% of females (n=70) cited people at their school
(either teachers or classmates). Similar percentages were found for both female and male
transgender (Oogachaga, 2012).
Oogachaga and Pink Dot’s (2016) joint report also cited concerns with the Ministry of
Education’s sexuality curriculum highlighting serious deficits in the curriculum, which
emphasize the criminality of gay behavior. The report concluded that the implications of a
curriculum that does not embrace sexual diversity and labels homosexuality as being a crime is
that it prevents school authorities from acknowledging the existence of LGBT victimization.
While these studies were administered by non-governmental organizations, which
provide support for the LGBTQ community in Singapore, they do provide insight into the
perceptions of this group in Singapore’s society. It is not that visible spaces do not exist in
Singapore as studies have suggested that certainly do (Phillip, 2014; Yue, 2012). The issue of
sexual diversity in local schools, however, appears to be a more contentious (Chong, 2011; Lim,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

24
2004; Obendorf, 2013). This would suggest that Friend’s (1993) model of systematic exclusion
and inclusion are occurring within Singapore’s local schools. As an international school based in
Singapore, The International School of East Asia is able to draw on support models and
structures from around the world. The school is committed to diversity and has created a
Statement of Community, communicating this commitment. In contrast to local Singaporean
schools, The International School of East Asia has student led clubs known as Gay-Straight
Alliances. The following section examines the key features of these student led clubs, the
benefits and challenges.
Gay-Straight Alliances: Form And Function
The primary goal of a Gay-Straight Alliance is to provide support to LGBTQ students
(Griffin, Lee, Waugh and Beyer, 2004). What are effective components required for an effective
GSA and what outcomes are produced in terms of student well-being? Some studies have found
the importance of an affirming school culture to be a key component (Poteat et al., 2015).
Research has also focused on how active the GSA is within a school. Studies have examined the
importance of the level of activity together with the organizational structure of a GSA (Heck et
al. 2013; Poteat, Heck, Yoshikawa, & Calzo, 2016; Seelman, Forge, Walls & Bridges, 2015).
Poteat et al. (2015) examined the balance between support and advocacy.
Although Gay-Straight Alliances are typically thought of as student led groups, the role
of the advisor has also been studied as a key component of a GSA. Several studies have focused
on the role of the adult faculty advisor within a GSA, examining areas such as experience, duties,
motivational aspects and whether sexual orientation has an impact (Mayo, 2013; Poteat et al.,
2015; Valenti & Campbell, 2009; Watson, Varjas, Meyers & Graybill, 2010).

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

25
Gay-Straight Alliances and School Context
Poteat et al. (2015) studied 146 youth and advisors in 13 GSAs, examining factors, which
related to positive youth development. The researchers purposefully sampled GSAs to represent
regions across Massachusetts with attention to factors such as race, socioeconomic diversity and
school size. This quantitative study drew attention to the broader school climate in predicting
student well-being for LGBTQ students. This study indicates an effective component of a GSA
to be visibility and financial support. Variability was noted in these fields across different GSAs
however those with greater support reported greater well-being (Poteat et al., 2015). This study
indicates the important role overall school support plays in successful outcomes of a GSA.
Activity Level and Organizational Structure
Several studies have examined activity levels and the organizational structure of a GSA
to determine whether these are effective components. Heck, Lindquist, Stewart, Brennan and
Cochran (2013) investigated 79 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender college students in a
retrospective study on their school experiences with a GSA. Their study indicated that more
active GSAs, “are associated with positive experiences and perceptions, while inactive GSAs are
associated with negative experiences and perceptions (Heck, Lindquist, Stewart, Brennan &
Cochran, 2013, p. 92). Poteat, Heck, Yoshikawa, and Calzo’s (2016) study of 295 youth in 33
GSAs also measured variables in regards to GSA participant engagement. They found that more
open and respectful environments lead to greater engagement in a GSA. Poteat et al. (2016)
observed “perceptions of more structure were associated with greater engagement to a point,
after which greater structure was related to less engagement” (p. 1733).
Seelman, Forge, Walls and Bridges (2015) tested a series of hypotheses around the theme
of student engagement and LGBTQ students in a GSA. The role and characteristics of a GSA
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

26
were examined, namely size, visibility, verbal support, and activity. The study aimed to see
whether perceptions of a strong, visible and well-supported, and active GSA led to greater school
engagement for LGBTQ students (Seelman et al., 2015). Findings indicated that the mere
presence of a GSA was not significantly associated with student school engagement however the
more visible, active and supported the GSA, the higher the level of student engagement (Seelman
et al., 2015). A notable finding in this study was the important role adults play in supporting
GSAs. Adults who foster safe, supportive environments at schools have a positive effect on
LGBTQ student well-being.
Role of Faculty Advisor
Although Macgillivray (2007) suggests Gay-Straight Alliances are “student clubs started
and run by students, for students” (p. 10), several studies indicate the role of faculty advisor to be
a major component of an effective GSA (Mayo, 2013; Poteat et al., 2015; Valenti & Campbell,
2009; Watson, Varjas, Meyers & Graybill, 2010).
Mayo’s (2013) case study of a select group of students in a GSA in a large Midwestern
city in the United States found that the GSA advisor’s use of critical pedagogy expanded
students’ knowledge on LGBTQ issues. Started in 2000, the demographics of this particular
GSA were predominately White with the majority of members self-identifying as straight allies.
The faculty advisor was a veteran teacher of 25 years and had spent 10 of her 11 years as the
faculty advisor at this school’s GSA. A key finding in the effectiveness of Mayo’s (2013) study
of this GSA was the infusion of knowledge resulting in students’ access to queer issues and
information. Mayo concludes that GSA’s have the power to move beyond a mere safe space to a
place of powerful, engaged learning.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

27
Experience of the faculty advisor was also a key finding of 13 GSAs located in
Massachusetts. This study included 18 advisor participants across the 13 GSAs. Advisors
ranged from 24 to 59 years of age (medium age = 42.13). Nine identified as heterosexual, 5 as
gay or lesbian, and 4 as bisexual. Time spent in the advisor role ranged from 7 months to 21
years (Poteat et al., 2015). The study found a direct link between length of advisor experience
and well-being of students who participated in such GSAs.
Valenti and Campbell’s (2009) qualitative study of 14 GSA advisors found two major
themes surrounding the motivation of choosing the role of advisor. Out of the 14 advisors, six
were female and eight were male with five self-identifying as lesbian gay or bisexual. The first
theme that emerged from this study was a protective attitude towards student who may be
LGBTQ. The second theme was a personal connection with students who may be LGBTQ.
Although the study indicated there were potential risks in becoming an advisor, the genuine care
for the well-being of LGBTQ students outweighed the risk (Valenti & Campbell, 2009). The
strong connection between advisors and LGBTQ issues is a notable feature of this study.
Watson, Varjas, Meyers and Graybill’s (2010) qualitative study of 22 advisors indicates sexual
orientation may play a role in being a facilitator to advocacy. Eleven of the 22 advisors self-
identified as either lesbian, gay, bisexual or queer-straight. Four of these advisors described their
sexual identity as being a facilitator to advocacy for students in their GSA.
There are many factors, which contribute to an effective Gay-Straight Alliance. A
supportive school culture along with visible and financial support, assist student well-being. The
level of activity within a GSA is also a contributing factor alongside the organizational structure
of the group. The role of advisor has been found to play a major role in the effectiveness of a
GSA. Length of time and experience as an advisor has been found to have a positive effect of
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

28
student well-being. Gay-Straight Alliances can become more than safe spaces for LGBTQ youth
or their allies. They can also be a place of learning whereby knowledge can used to empower
students.
Gay-Straight Alliances: The Benefits
How does the presence of a Gay-Straight Alliance benefit the members of the alliance,
the school and the broader community? An alliance can create a school environment that is safer
and more inclusive for LGBTQ students. Higher levels of school belonging have been reported
since GSAs encourage a culture of supportive educators and peers (Kosciw et al., 2016). Several
studies have indicated how socialization is a major benefit in LGBTQ student well-being (Poteat,
Heck, Yoshikawa, & Calzo, 2016; Fetner & Elafros, 2015). Victimization and harassment of
LGBTQ students continues to occur within schools in the United States (for a comprehensive
summary, see Extent and Effects of Hostile School Climate, pp. 9-50, Kosciw et al., 2016). The
presence of a Gay-Straight Alliance has been found to be an effective buffer on the negative
effects of homophobic victimization (Heck, Flentje, & Cochran, 2011; Marx & Kettrey, 2016;
Toomey & Russell, 2013). Several studies have found that affirmative school environments
created by the presence of a Gay-Straight Alliance have reduced risks for illicit drug use and
alcohol consumption (Heck, Livingston, Flentje, Oost, Stewart & Cochran, 2014; Coulter,
Birkett., Corliss, Hatzenbuehler., Mustanski, & Stall, 2016). Poteat, Sinclair, DiGiovanni,
Koenig and Russell (2013) found that less truancy was observed at schools with GSAs as
compared to those without one as well as a reduction in smoking, drinking, suicide attempts and
casual sex.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

29
Buffer on Negative Effects of Victimization and Harassment
The effects of a hostile school environment in the United States upon LGBTQ students
are well documented. The 2015 National School Climate Survey (NSCS) by GLSEN reports:
Schools nationwide are hostile environments for a distressing number of LGBTQ
students, the overwhelming majority of whom routinely hear anti-LGBT language and
experience victimization and discrimination at school. As a result, many LGBTQ
students avoid school activities or miss school entirely (Kosciw et al., 2016, p. xvi).
In a systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 primary studies with 62,923 participants,
Marx and Kettrey (2016) found that the presence of a GSA was associated with significantly
lower levels of homophobic victimization and harassment. These findings indicate that a GSA
can act as a buffer to the negative effects of a hostile school climate on LGBTQ youth. Heck,
Flentje and Cochran (2013) conducted a quantitative study on high schools, comparing those
schools, which had a GSA and those, which did not. Surveying 145 LGBT youth aged between
18-20, this retrospective study include 79 participants who reported their school had a GSA, and
66 participants who indicated their school did not. One hundred and two participants identified
as White, while 14 identified as African American with the remaining participants identifying as
Asian American, Hispanic and Native American (12 participants selected other). For items on
at-school victimization (while in high school), the study utilized nine questions from Olweus’
Bullying and Victimization scale (as cited in Heck, Flentje & Cochran, 2013). An additional item
on hearing homophobic jokes and comments was added. Heck, Flentje & Cochran (2013)
reported significantly less at-school victimization due to sexual orientation at schools with GSAs
when compared to those schools, which did not have a GSA. A number of limitations were
noted in this study, which limit the generalizability of this study. Heck, Flentje & Cochran state,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

30
“GSAs should be viewed as indicative of an environment that may be conducive to healthy
development for LGBT youth” (2013, p. 87).
Several studies have also questioned the presence of a GSA on at-school victimization
and harassment. Toomey, Ryan, Diaz and Russell’s (2011) study examined associations
between LGBQ youth participation in a GSA and their experiences of at-school victimization.
Their findings indicate that the presence of a GSA, “significantly moderated the associations
between school victimization based on sexual orientation” (Toomey et al., 2011, p. 510). This
association, however, was shown at low levels of school victimization. Toomey et al. (2011)
found that “any potential benefit of GSA presence dissipated at high levels of school
victimization (p. 510). The researchers concluded that while GSAs can play some role towards
buffering the negative effects of victimization, GSA’s alone should not be considered to be the
final solution in ensuring safer environments for LGBTQ students.
Poteat et al. (2013) meta-analysis of 15, 965 students in 45 Wisconsin schools focused on
the role and effects of GSAs. While they found a significant interaction between a GSA and
sexual orientation for “truancy, smoking, drinking, suicide attempts (but not ideation) and sexual
behavior with casual partners” (Poteat et al., 2013, p. 325), GSA-related findings for
victimization were not significant. The researchers stated the smaller number of schools in the
sample (n = 45) might have been a limiting factor. While it is difficult to define the contribution
a GSA can have on at-school victimization and harassment, these studies all point to an overall
positive effect on the school environment for LGBTQ youth, contributing, in some degree, to a
feeling of safety.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

31
Safe Spaces and Gay-Straight Alliances
The presence of a Gay-Straight Alliance as a safe space for LGBTQ students is often
cited as one of the most important roles a GSA can play in supporting such students. Studies
have affirmed the need to foster safe and inclusive spaces for LGBTQ students and how a GSA
can assist in this process (Fetner, Elafros, Bortolin & Drechsler, 2012; Griffin, Lee, Waugh &
Beyer, 2004; Lee, 2002; Steck & Perry, 2016; Walls, Kane & Wisneski, 2010).
Griffin, Lee, Waugh and Beyer’s (2004) qualitative study examined four roles GSAs
played in 22 schools. These schools all participated in the Massachusetts’ Safe Schools
Program. Griffin et al. (2004) suggest that while a GSA can be a primary vehicle for creating a
safe space for LGBTQ youth, they caution the notion that a GSA can be a safe space for all
LGBTQ students. This study indicated that the needs of LGBTQ can vary and, in some
instances, may not be perceived to be a good fit for all students. Examples included GSAs where
the majority of members were predominantly heterosexual allies or had questioning students who
were not comfortable identifying themselves in the GSA.
Steck and Perry’s (2016) descriptive study explored the perceptions of seven high school
administrators and their experiences with Gay-Straight Alliances. The administrators in this
study saw the GSA as a venue whereby a culture of openness and acceptance could be cultivated.
Central to the role of a GSA, was the need to create a space where LGBTQ students could be
themselves. The administrators in this study perceived the GSA’s greatest strength to be a
LGBTQ inclusive space. The notion of a safe space was not, however, seen as a space for social
justice. A GSA was not perceived as a place for activism. Steck and Perry (2016) cite Britzman
(1995) and Goldstein and colleagues (2007) warning of the danger of GSAs becoming, “a
marginal othered space with limited affect on disrupting the heteronormative bias …” (p. 370).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

32
Fetner, Elafros, Bortolin and Drechsler (2012) developed a conceptual framework of safe
spaces based on Polletta’s (1999) sociological work to determine what are the qualities that make
a space safe. Fetner et al., (2012) created three questions, which they applied in a qualitative
study using interviews via online messaging. The three questions target context, membership
inclusivity or exclusivity and finally, the relationship between safe spaces and what occurs
within that space. Placed into simple language, the questions are safe from what?; safe from
whom?; safe to do what?
Fifty-seven online interviews with youth aged 18-25 who had participated in a Gay-
Straight Alliance in high school were conducted using the three questions. The first question
revealed contexts vary greatly within schools. The more hostile a school environment is, the
greater the level of containment is within a GSA. The second question indicates that experiences
within a GSA vary dependent on the person. The study noted that heterosexual allies were
warmly welcomed (often straight allies provided a cover for those not ready to disclose their
sexual identity) but students of color were likely to be marginalized from a GSA. Finally, the
third question again raised the limited abilities of a GSA to create change in the broader school
community.
Safe spaces are an integral benefit of a Gay-Straight Alliance. This is especially
important in schools where hostility may be greater. While a GSA’s greatest strength is to
provide an inclusive, safe space for LGBTQ youth and their allies, questions remain over
whether such spaces are safe for all students and does intersectionality play a role in excluding
others from participating in a GSA.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

33
Greater Visibility and Support
Gay-Straight Alliances aim to increase visible spaces for LGBTQ youth as well as
provide support. Lee (2002) reported that participants from a small, purposeful qualitative study
in Salt Lake City, Utah, ‘developed a sense of pride and were no longer ashamed of who they
were” (p. 20). Participants were all members of the first GSA in the state and had begun to take
more active roles in their school. Griffin et al. (2004) indicate the main purpose of a GSA is to
raise awareness of LGBTQ issues in schools. Steck and Perry’s study of seven administrators
indicate that despite barriers in terms of board opposition, many administrators “believed they
had a responsibility as school leaders to set a tone of acceptance and inclusion of all students by
publicly supporting the GSA …” (2016, p. 365).
Seelman et al. (2015) conducted a study examining LGBTQ students at school and the
relationship between student engagement and access to safe adults and GSAs. Their findings
confirmed one hypothesis, which stated certain GSA characteristics such as size, visibility,
verbal support, and activity would predict greater student school engagement. Seelman et al.
(2015) state, “results indicate that the more large, visible, well-supported, and active a GSA was
perceived to be within a school, the more LGBTQ students were engaged at school” (p. 26).
Youth Empowerment
The presence of a Gay-Straight Alliance may also empower LGBTQ youth and this
empowerment may extend beyond high school once a student graduates. Sweat, Marzullo, Herdt
and Russell (2006) suggest GSAs play a strong role in youth empowerment and social justice
issues, likening this youth movement to that of the civil rights movement for African Americans.
Russell, Muraco, Subramaniam and Laub (2009) qualitative study explored how youth define
and experience empowerment in youth-led organizations such as GSAs. The study indicated that
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

34
sexuality activism could lead to a sense of empowerment among youth leaders in GSAs in terms
of having and using knowledge, personal and relational empowerment. These provide
possibilities for young people to have direct influence on social and sexual justice issues through
change in their schools. Mayberry (2013) studied the experiences of GSA members, advisors
and administrators from four public high schools in southeastern United States. Applying
different levels of empowerment, Mayberry examined ways in which GSA members may or may
not be empowered to challenge heteronormative norms in their schools. Mayberry (2013) found
that although a GSA may empower members to speak out again harassment, there are limiting
factors such as parental and community resistance, which can restrict the efforts of a Gay-
Straight Alliance in engaging in certain levels of activism. This study suggests that while GSAs
can empower youth, there are limitations within schools and the wider school community as to
the extent of the level of activism members of a GSA can exercise.
A Gay-Straight Alliance can create an inclusive space for LGBTQ youth. The extent to
which a GSA can act as a buffer to the negative effects of victimization and harassment are
challenging to determine. It appears that the degree to which a GSA can act as a buffer depends
on the level of hostility. Research suggests that while the GSA does play an important role in
combatting hostility towards LGBTQ youth, it is important that schools do not see a GSA as the
sole intervention in support systems for sexual minorities. The safe space a GSA creates is one
major benefit however, again, schools need to consider all variables, including could a GSA
itself become a vehicle for further marginalization. Research also suggests that a more visible
and active GSA results in greater benefits for LGBTQ youth. One final benefit of a GSA may be
the empowerment of youth. Limitations on the levels of empowerment may be caused by
external factors outside the structure of a GSA. While a GSA can certainly act as a positive
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

35
influence upon the lives of LGBTQ students in school, there do exist numerous challenges,
which schools would be mindful to pay attention to, when considering the well-being of all
students.
Gay-Straight Alliances: The Challenges
Gay-Straight Alliances do come with many challenges. Watson et al. (2010) identified
numerous barriers GSA advisors faced when trying to create change on LGBTQ issues in
schools. The GSA advisors in this study revealed that sociocultural, school-based and individual
factors could either aide or frustrate the efforts of LGBTQ advocacy. Watson et al. (2010)
suggest it is important schools understand how each factor can interact, in order to create
sustainable change. Steck and Perry’s (2016) study on school administrators perceptions on
GSAs indicated the challenges these leaders faced when a GSA was not officially endorsed by a
school board or when limited funds were made available to support such a club. The
administrators in this study also described, “being confronted with opposition and push back
from other students in response to informational powers and other GSA activities addressing
inclusion and social justice issues” (Steck & Perry, 2016, p. 367).
Several studies have identified the issue of racial minority groups, creating further layers
of marginalization (Griffin et al., 2004; Poteat et al., 2015). Griffin et al. (2004) found that not
all students considered a GSA a safe space and noted this finding consistent with other research,
that LGBT students of color, openly self-identified students or questioning students did not
always consider a GSA a suitable, safe space (McCreedy, as cited in Griffin et al, 2004). Poteat
et al. (2015) found that while racial/ethnic minority youth reported greater well-being than White
youth, “they reported lower perceived support from their GSA” (p. 188). Their
recommendations emphasized the need to consider issues of racial diversity in GSAs.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

36
Heterosexual Allies
Heterosexual allies (students who do not identify as LGBTQ), also have a role to play in
a Gay-Straight Alliance. In terms of peer acceptance, “GSAs provide an opportunity for LGBTQ
students and their allies to meet together in the school environment, and they may also provide
an opportunity for LGBTQ students and issues to be visible to other students in school” (Kosciw
et al., 2016, p. 63). Challenges, however, can arise for those student allies who participate in a
GSA. Goldstein and Davis (2010) surveyed 46 heterosexual members of a college based GSA in
order to gain an understanding of the characteristics of such students who commit to a GSA.
They found allies were exposed to sexual prejudice and stigma by association. Almost 33% of
the students surveyed worried that others may think they were gay or lesbian if they were
outspoken on LGBT issues. Fifty six percent expected that allies would be perceived as LGB
and only 24% felt it likely that allies would be respected by other heterosexuals (Goldman &
Davis, 2010). As Griffin et al. (2004) state, “for heterosexual members, the GSA can be a
vehicle for acting on the value of inclusion and for supporting LGBT family members and
friends” (p. 18). However, challenges arise for both heterosexual allies and the GSA members
who may be LGBTQ. The following statement summarizes the challenges GSAs face in meet
the needs of all members; “GSAs are not static ‘one size fits all’ clubs” (Griffin et al., 2004, p.
19).
Concealment
Heck et al. (2013) referenced Meyer’s minority stress model to highlight a challenge
LGBTQ youth may face when considering joining a Gay-Straight Alliance. The retrospective
study of 79 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender college students examined their experiences
attending high schools with a GSA. One finding revealed some participants did not wish to
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

37
associate with structures such as a GSA. One participant was fearful participation would lead to
his parents knowing he was gay. His efforts to conceal were fueled by a fear of rejection. Heck
et al. (2013) reported that two factors from Meyer’s (2003) minority stress model, concealment
spurred on by a fear of rejection, might contribute to GSA non-membership. Kwon (2013)
discusses outness in relation to LGB resilience. Noting the numerous benefits (higher social
support, tailored health care, higher relationship satisfaction), Kwon states that although outness
is related to better well-being, it “should not be considered a universal resilience factor” (2013,
p. 374). When considering outness for LGB youth in schools, Kwon (2013) suggests there are
inconsistent findings in this area although the role of social support is a key factor, in regards to
either a supportive or negative reaction.
Challenging the Heteronormative which Underlies Victimization, Harassment or
Marginalization
A final challenge schools may face with Gay-Straight Alliances is that while the GSA
may seek provide a safe, inclusive space for students who may be LGBTQ, it may not
specifically target heteronormative values which often underlie the victimization, harassment or
marginalization of LGBTQ students (Watson et al, 2010). Griffin et al. (2004) emphasize this
important point suggesting that while ensuring the creation of inclusive, safe zones for LGBTQ
students is one of the prime goals of a GSA:
The focus on the safety of GSA members, however, does not necessarily address larger
patterns of heterosexism, sexism, or racism embedded in school policy, practice or
programming. Demanding tolerance and respect for gender and sexual nonconformity
among students may help to make schools safer for them, but does not challenge the
norms and expectations that underlie violence, harassment, or discrimination (p. 20).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

38
This statement is supported in Steck and Perry’s (2016) study of high school
administrators perceptions of GSAs. Pushback from various sectors of the school community led
to limited challenges to the overt heteronormative culture. Administrators in this study often
resorted to sustaining heteronormative systems and structures, while also attempting to openly
support GSAs.
Summary
In order for schools to ensure visibility and inclusion of all students, they must consider
an important subset of students, those who may identify as LGBTQ. When schools do not
address the needs of this group of students by not ensuring the allocation of visible, safe spaces
and actively implementing inclusive policy, they reinforce prejudice, which leads to further
marginalization (Grayson, 1987). Visibility, active representation and the need for
counterspaces in schools are important considerations when schools aim for an equitable
approach in regards to LGBTQ support (Cerezo & Bergfield, 2003). School based resources
such as student led clubs are one example of providing such spaces for LGBTQ students.
Limited research on LGBTQ support for students in local schools in Singapore would
strongly suggest that inclusive practices are unlikely to visible. While visible spaces for LGBTQ
certainly exist in Singapore society (Phillip, 2014; Yue, 2012; also see Pink Dot | Supporting the
freedom to love, n.d.), the topic of homosexuality is a silenced topic in Singaporean local schools
(Chong, 2011; Lim, 2004; Obendorf, 2013). International schools, however, which cater to
expatriate students living in Singapore, are another matter.
A primary example of LGBTQ support in schools in the United States is a Gay-Straight
Alliance. Research has indicated several components, which are important when considering the
effectiveness of these student led groups. School context plays a strong role. The more visible
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

39
and actively supported a GSA is, the more effective it will be. Greater activity within a GSA
will lead to greater student engagement in schools by LGBTQ students. While a GSA is a
student led group, the role of adult advocacy is paramount. The faculty advisor, an educator
appointed to facilitate a GSA, is central to successful support and LGBTQ advocacy. GSAs are,
therefore, more than just a safe space for LGBTQ students and their allies, they can also be
places of learning and centers for growth in social justice causes.
The presences of a Gay-Straight Alliance in a school brings many benefits as well as
challenges. Benefits include greater socialization, reduced occurrences of high-risk behaviors
and greater student engagement. The GSA may also act as an effective buffer on negative
effects of victimization and harassment. More importantly, a GSA can provide greater visibility
and support to the LGBTQ community within a school. With greater student engagement, comes
greater youth empowerment. Limitations on this empowerment, however, may be influenced by
external factors outside the Gay-Straight Alliance. This highlights common challenges such as
oppositional forces or factors both internal and external to the school, which can negatively
impact LGBTQ advocacy. Further challenges exist in regards to support the needs of all students
who may wish to engage in a GSA. These challenges revolve around racial minorities, the
impact of heterosexual allies and issues stigmatization and do all LGBTQ students wish to
actively be a part of a GSA. Research has indicated that not all GSAs are identical and nor
should they be (Griffin et al., 2004). A final but importance challenge is while GSAs can
provide safe spaces for LGBTQ students, are these student led clubs effective at challenge the
heteronormative practices external to the GSA, which ultimately lead to the underlying issues of
prejudice and marginalization. Research would indicate that GSAs are not necessarily effective
in this respect (Griffin et al., 2004; Steck and Perry, 2016; Watson et al, 2010).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

40
Sadoski (2016) states that no one would disagree that a school’s purpose is to ensure all
students feel safe. In order for students to function well in a school, safety and well-being must
co-exist (Twemlow, Fonagy & Sacco, 2002). The 2015 National School Climate Survey
documents progress in the improving lives of LGBTQ students in many educational settings
throughout the United States, highlighting the success of the presence of school-based
interventions, which advocate inclusive, supportive practices (Kosciw et al., 2016). Despite
these positive trends, key findings still indicate schools continue to be hostile environments for
LGBTQ youth in the United States (Kosciw, Palmer, Kull & Greytak, 2013; Kosciw et al., 2016;
Toomey & Russell, 2016). Kosciw, Palmer, Kull, and Greytak (2013).
The International School of East Asia is committed to diversity through the school’s
‘Statement of Community’, which asserts all members of the school community are valued and
should be treated with dignity and respect (Statement of Community | The International School
of East Asia, n.d). Understanding member perceptions of The International School of East
Asia’s Gay-Straight Alliance can contribute towards a better understanding of support systems
and structures for LGBTQ students. This new knowledge is important, not only for The
International School of East Asia, but also for other international schools. The geographic
location of the school is significant considering the multiple barriers to inclusivity and the
challenges, which exist in recognition of sexual diversity in Singapore.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to gain an understanding of the needs of a subset of students
who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning. The study explored the perceptions
of those students who participate in a Gay-Straight Alliance at The International School of East
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

41
Asia, in order to gain a better understanding of their school experience in terms of support
systems and structures. The specific research questions that elaborate the research purpose are:
1. What perceptions do students who participate in the Gay Straight Alliance
club (GSA) have of the support systems at The International School of East Asia?
2. How do members of the GSA feel about the role the alliance plays in helping them
succeed in their academic and social-emotional well-being?
3. What other kinds of support services would members of the GSA like to see at The
International School of East Asia?
Understanding the members of this Gay-Straight Alliance at The International School of
East Asia and their perceptions of support systems and structures will help guide and shape
school policy towards better meeting the needs of LGBTQ students. This knowledge can not
only help The International School of East Asia, but also other international schools, both in
Singapore and around the world.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

42
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The following sections provide an outline of the methodological approach used to gather
data for this qualitative study. It provides background information on the participants and the
rationale for purposeful sample selection. Instrumentation for data collection utilized semi-
structured interviews. Access to the site and procedural approaches for data collection is
described. Finally, a brief overview is provided on the approach to analysis of the interview and
observational transcripts using qualitative coding methods.
Participants and Sampling Rationale
A detail of participants has been provided in Table One and includes information on
gender expression, sexual orientation, and race & ethnic identity. Information such as nationality
and grade level was purposefully omitted as a means of ensuring a higher degree of anonymity.
Guidelines were provided to participants to assist with certain terms [see Definition of Terms|
Centers for Educational Justice & Community Engagement (2016) and Racial and Ethnic
Categories and Definitions for NIH Diversity Programs and for Other Reporting Purposes.
(2015)]. The faculty advisor of the Gay-Straight Alliance in this study, played an initial role in
introducing the study to members. Participants were invited into this study with the assurance
that all identities would be kept confidential through the use of pseudonyms. Although all
members were under the age of 18, parental consent was initially waivered by the institutional
review board, under the ruling entitled Human Research Protection Program Flexibility Policy.
This was due to the nature of the topic and to respect those members who may not be
comfortable having others know about their participation in either the study or the Gay-Straight
Alliance. The administration of the school, however, determined this ruling contravened school
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

43
policy, which culminated in the requirement for participants to have the consent of one parent or
guardian.
Respondent selection for this study employed a technique known as purposeful sampling.
Nonprobability sampling is a common method of choice for most qualitative research (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Purposeful sampling is intentional, often small and aims to select those who
can provide deep insight. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state purposeful sampling aims “to
discover, understand and gain insight … from which the most can be learned” (p. 96).
Selection criteria for the sample were clearly dictated by several attributes for this study.
First, the participants of the study had to members of the selected Gay-Straight Alliance, at The
International School of East Asia (ISEA). This Gay-Straight Alliance was the case to be studied.
Students who were members of this GSA (within the case) were then invited to participate (see
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, pp. 99-101 on tier two sampling). Second, the selected members for
the study were regular participants in the GSA and participation in study would be voluntary.
The researcher liaised with faculty advisor to schedule a brief information session during one of
the weekly GSA meetings. The researcher informed the members on the purpose of the study,
while also clarifying participation in the study would require parental consent of one parent or
guardian. All members were provided with an information sheet (see Appendix A) and were
asked to approach the faculty advisor in person, should they be interested (a second, follow up
information session was held one week later by the two presiding student officers of the GSA).
Third, while participation in the study was voluntary, it was clear that the parental
consent requirement was a limiting factor in the final pool of participants. The researcher
observed this reticence after the initial presentation to the members of the GSA, when one
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

44
member gracefully returned the information sheet, indicating their participation would not be
possible due to this requirement.
Table 1
Participant Profile Information 1
Participant Pseudonym Gender Expression:
identifies as)
8

Sexual Orientation:

Race & ethnic
identity
9

1 Alex Gender fluid Asexual White
2 Fran Cisgender female Pan sexual Latino
3 Kyle Cisgender
male/gender fluid
Gay Asian/Latino/White
4 Mana

Cisgender female Unsure Japanese/American

The final participant sample is provided above in Table 1. Although parental consent
was clearly an influencing factor on self-selection in terms of those members who finally
volunteered, participant one may have navigated through this issue under the guise of being a
heterosexual ally. Pseudonyms were chosen to the researcher. It was decided to not to include
grade level and nationality. The participants were invited to determine their gender expression,
sexual orientation and race & ethnicity during interview using previously mentioned tools to
guide them. These questions were voluntary.
This particular Gay-Straight Alliance meets once per week. There is one regular faculty
advisor, who identifies as female and heterosexual. Meetings are held in the classroom of the
faculty advisor during student lunch recess. Average weekly participation can fluctuate.
According to Kyle, one of the co-presidents interviewed, member attendance ranges from a
minimum of 15 to a maximum of 20 students.

8
See guidelines from Definition of Terms| Centers for Educational Justice & Community
Engagement (2016).
9
See guidelines from Racial and Ethnic Categories and Definitions for NIH Diversity Programs
and for Other Reporting Purposes (2015).
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

45
All members interviewed in this study are regular attendees of the same GSA (see Table
2 for roles and additional information). Three members reported they attend weekly, while one
member, Mana, stated she attends every other week. Two of the participants, Fran and Kyle,
hold the position of GSA co-president. Alex, the first participant to be interviewed, used the
term ally in their description of themselves. To honor Alex’s profile, the pronouns, they, them,
their will be employed (see Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual
Resource Center, n.d.).
Table 2
Participant Profile Information 2: Roles and additional information
Participant Pseudonym Additional information
1 Alex GSA member: Attended since beginning
of school year. Used term ally. Attends
weekly.

2 Fran GSA co-president: Long-term participant
at current GSA. Experience with GSAs
at other schools.

3 Kyle GSA co-president: 4-year involvement at
current school. Attends weekly.

4 Mana GSA member: Attended since beginning
of school year. Experience with a GSA at
another international school in Asia

Instruments
The following is a description of the tools used to collect data for this study.
Semi-structured Interviews
The study employed qualitative methods in the form of semi-structured interviews.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state, “the overall purposes of qualitative research are to achieve an
understanding of how people make sense out their lives, delineate the process … of meaning-
making, and describe how people interpret what they experience” (p. 15). Qualitative research
draws from the philosophy of phenomenology, which aims to capture the basic structure of
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

46
experience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The use of the qualitative method complements the
research questions in this study. The goal is to make meaning of those GSA members who may
or do self-identify as LGBTQ and their world. In order to gain insight into the meaning of
experience, Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state “the phenomenological interview is the primary
method of data collection” (p. 27). Weiss (1995) states interviewing informs us about the nature
of social life and it provides insight into the people’s interior experiences. Interviews were
therefore the primary instrument for data collection.
The interview protocol included a brief purpose of the study, the anticipated duration of
the interview, information on how findings would be published, and a request to record the
interview. Interview questions were prepared for the interview with an introduction, three main
themes with transitions and possible probes. The protocol included an interview guide, a list of
questions, open-ended in nature, which could be followed up with probes. The goal of the guide
was to provide an order and structure for questions with a degree of flexibility to probe and
clarify when necessary. The semi-structured nature of the protocol guided the questions and
issues to be explored however the order and exact wording was flexible to allow for adjustments
in each interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview questions asked for information
related to background, experiences, opinions and feelings. The protocol included hypothetical,
devil’s advocate, ideal position and interpretative questions. The purpose of using a range of
questions was to elicit answers, which would address the three research questions in the study
(see Appendix B).
Procedure
The study was conducted on site at The International School of East Asia (ISEA). It was
determined that interviews be conducted on site. The researcher discussed possible locations for
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

47
interviews, which would be comfortable for the participants, provide a reasonable quiet space for
interviewing, and yet be observable.
Negotiation of the research relationships with the final candidates was done in person
after the initial study information presentations. The faculty advisor played an intermediary role
in introducing the researcher to the participants. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) stress the importance
of establishing relations in qualitative research, whether the research method are observations,
interviewing, or document research. They highlight that “even with less extensive interviewing,
the emphasis is on equality, closeness, and informality in the relationship rather than on authority
and control by the researcher and formality in the encounter” (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007, p. 83).
Maxwell (2013) states the nature of a relationship with participants is one that allows a
researcher to “ethically gain the information that can answer the research questions” (p. 90). The
researcher gained access to the site in semester one of the 2017-18 school year. Although the
researcher was an employee of the school, there was not direct link in terms of teacher-student
relationships, since the researcher worked in the elementary division of the school. Invitation to
the study was voluntary. Participants were advised that they could withdraw at any stage of the
study process. An incentive to participate in this study was provided. Participants would be
provided with a voucher to a designated food outlet in the school cafeteria. The value of this
voucher would not exceed $20 Singaporean dollars.
Interviews with the participants of the study were conducted over semester one of the
2017-18 school year. Participation in data collection for interviews was voluntary. Each
participant had received two copies of the study information sheet (see Appendix B). One signed
copy was returned to the researcher via the GSA faculty advisor. All interviews were conducted
during school hours. The interview site was an office located in the elementary school. The
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

48
selected room provided privacy to the participants, as it was separate from the senior school.
The date and times for the interviews were negotiated to suit the respondents. As the researcher
received signed copies of the information sheet, a standard email was then sent to the student’s
school email address (see Appendix C). Interview dates and times were negotiated to suit the
respondents and their availability.
The purpose of the study was explained at the beginning of each interview as per the
interview protocol. Permission to record was requested at the beginning of each interview.
Recording was done using an application called QuickVoicePro and a backup Sony recording
device (copies of sound files were then transferred to a password protected laptop and the
original sound files were deleted from the two recording devices). Observation notes were also
taken during the interviews. These were hand written on a hard copy of the interview guide
under a section called observational notes. Each recording was later transcribed manually to a
word document with a column on the left for data analysis.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Creswell (2014) recommends the application of multiple approaches when addressing the
issue of validity and reliability in qualitative research. Stating researcher bias is one important
strategy. The researcher must clarify the bias they bring to a study, especially in regards to their
interpretation of the findings. Creswell states this may be shaped by, “their background, …
gender, culture, history and socioeconomic status.” (p. 202). As researcher, I self-identify as
male, gay and white. When presenting this study to members of the Gay-Straight Alliance, I
purposely shared my identity in terms of gender expression, sexual orientation and race/ethnicity.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state, “the human instrument has shortcomings and biases” (p. 16).
They clarify that rather than attempting to eliminate these biases, it is important to identify and
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

49
monitor them in relation to theoretical frameworks, while maintain an awareness of how the
researcher’s own interests may shape collection and interpretation of data. As a researcher who
is gay and male, it was essential that I consistently checked for my own personal bias during the
collection and analysis process. A self-reflection diary was maintained during data collection.
This reflective process was a useful tool to note personal thoughts and responses.
Rich descriptive data is another tool used in this study to address credibility and
trustworthiness. Creswell (2014) states, “when qualitative researchers provide detailed
descriptions of the settings … or offer many perspectives about a theme, the results become more
realistic and richer” (p. 202). Although this study resulted in only four interviews, each of the
four participants provided rich descriptive data, which has been used to convey findings.
Data Analytic Strategy
The first step in analyzing the interview data began with reading the first of the
observational field notes and interview transcripts. Each transcript was formatted on a document
with each line numbered. The next step was to insert comments next to words, phrases,
sentences or paragraphs that were potentially relevant to the study. Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
state,
This process of making notations next to bits of data that strike you as potentially relevant
for answering your research questions is also called coding … Because you are being
open to anything possible at this point, this form of coding is often called open coding (p.
204).
After reading the first interview transcript, the first list of open codes was created. The
next step was to read through this open code list and color code. Color-coding grouped
comments together into categories. This process of grouping open codes is known as axial or
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

50
analytical coding (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Opening coding was then repeated for each
subsequent interview transcript, following the same process. The list of groupings extracted
from the first interview, was used as a constant comparison, in order to examine patterns and any
irregularities. The culmination of this process resulted in a master list of themes or categories,
which spanned across each data set (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The final stage in the process was to condense categories into fewer, more comprehensive
categories. Once a tentative scheme of themes was arrived at, evidence was sorted into the
relevant findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This approach in constructing categories starts
from the ground up, and begins with the original data. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state,
“construction of categories is highly inductive” (p. 210). The shift to a more deductive mode of
analysis begins when the researcher starts to test tentative categories against the data. This
becomes evident when saturation is reached, when no new patterns or trends appear (Merrian &
Tisdell, 2016).

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

51
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
In this chapter, I describe the themes that emerged from the interviews of the four
participants organized by each research question. Overall, analysis of the data revealed that the
participants considered peer support essential. The role the Gay-Straight Alliance played was
central to support for LGBTQ students at the school. I found that the four participants
considered the school could do more to support LGBTQ students and that inclusive education for
all members of the school community was seen as an important factor in improving the school
experience for LGBTQ students.
The following themes emerged from this study:
1. While formal support systems, such as counseling services and school policy, were
identified as forms of support, they are perceived to be secondary to peer support.
Such formal services generally carry a lower level of trust, when it comes to how best
they support LGBTQ students.
2. Less formal support services such as friends/peers are perceived to be preferential to
more formal services as they carry a higher level of trust.
3. The Gay-Straight Alliance is the primary and most visible, safe space providing a
venue to be authentic, to share & learn, to mutually support other members. It allows
members to have a sense of community and belonging.
4. The Gay-Straight Alliance helps members internally but outreach beyond the GSA at
a school and community level is limited.
5. There is a need to address existing barriers through the creation of more inclusive
practices for LGBTQ students.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

52
6. There is a need to design and deliver more LGBTQ educational programs aimed at
different sectors of the school community.
7. There is a need to create and implement school policies, which are more inclusive and
will better protect LGBTQ students at the school.
I will now present each theme in relation to the three research questions of this study.
Research Question 1: What perceptions do students, who participate in the Gay-Straight
Alliance club (GSA), have of the support systems at The International School of East Asia?
Two themes emerged from the first research question, which focused on other forms of
support at the school for LGBTQ students. These themes are:
• While formal support systems, such as counseling services and school policy, were
identified as forms of support, they are perceived to be secondary to peer support. Such
formal services generally carry a lower level of trust, when it comes to how best they
support LGBTQ students.
• Less formal support services such as friends/peers are perceived to be preferential to
more formal services as they carry a higher level of trust.
Formal support.
Two formal mechanisms of support for LGBTQ students identified by the participants
were counseling services and school policy. Perceptions of how these services helped LGBTQ
students at the school varied.
One formal support service, counseling, was identified by all four participants as a
service that could be accessed by students who identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender
or questioning (LGBTQ). An emerging theme centered on concerns regarding confidentiality.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

53
Counseling services. All four participants talked about counseling as an additional
means of support for students who may identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or
questioning at the school. However, when asked whether any of the participants would access
such services, the response was varied and sometimes cautionary. One participant said just
knowing the counseling service existed was good to know, “even though I don't always go
there”. Seeing visual LGBTQ affirmative materials (such as flags and acronyms) on display in
the counseling offices was also important for this participant’s well-being who stated, “those
probably don't mean much to them but they mean a ton to me … people know that I exist”.
Another participant equated going to see a counselor meant someone had a problem and did not
see it as a service they would necessarily access for LGBTQ related matters. One participant,
who was fairly new to the school, stated she was not actually well informed on what support
systems were in place for LGBTQ students. She added that this was in contrast to her prior
school where support systems were clearly communicated. In terms of counseling services, she
had only accessed counselors to receive academic advice. One participant stated he had a very
positive relationship with his counselors, however, he also highlighted that student-counselor
relationships could be inconsistent, since counselors, “are not all the same”.
LGBTQ, confidentiality and counseling. Approaching counselors on LGBTQ matters
raised the concern over confidentiality and information sharing with parents. One participant
was wary of discussing matters of gender expression with counselors at school. They were
concerned that information shared with counselors, could be shared with parents. Other
participants in the study shared similar views.
Fran felt that maintaining anonymity was synonymous with being safe. She outlined her
concerns of confidentiality and counselors and contrasted this with the safe space of the GSA.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

54
She stated, “I think a lot of people have the perception that, like, oh if I go to a counselor then
they're going to tell my parents”. Fran moved on to contrast this with the anonymity she feels
within the support network of the GSA. She said, “I think that the considerations that our
teacher sponsor
10
takes to help make us feel safe in it, like oh don't worry your name is not going
to be published, it's very anonymous and I think that that makes a difference in the people who
come in. They feel very comfortable at the GSA”.
School policy. Two out of the four participants stated school policy was key in helping
LGBTQ students feel safe and supported. While both Kyle and Mana felt school policy was one
important way schools can support LGBTQ students, they both indicated that policy at The
International School of East Asia could do more to better support LGBTQ students. Kyle felt
strongly about policy and inclusive practices. He cited a prior incident where the school
removed a gay character in a middle school play, which he felt was due to the views of an
opposing parent. He questioned whether he would be able to wear a skirt as school uniform
since he identifies as both non-binary and male. Kyle stated, “Although I don't really participate
in prom or anything, I'm not entirely sure, well actually I don't know if they would let, like same
sex couples attend prom. I imagine there would be controversy regardless”. Kyle felt that
because The International School of East Asia was a private institution, it, “tends to be a bit at
the whim of the parents because like they pay tuition”. He felt that regardless of how faculty
specifically treated him and his community, “the policy of the school in general lags and lags in
many areas … in these types of things”.
Mana drew on her unique perspective of comparing The International School of East
Asia (ISEA) with her prior international school. She stated that she had assumed ISEA would

10
Teacher sponsor here refers to the Gay-Straight Alliance’s faculty advisor
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

55
have had clearly articulated, well established policies on inclusivity similar to other international
schools she had attended. When referencing the importance of school policy in supporting
LGBTQ students, she added, “I'm not sure because they're not very, sort of, open about it. I
guess in the sense that they don't advertise it or let you know that there's protections for people of
any sort of sexuality or race. That sort of comes from going to schools where previously it's been
established very clearly”.
Peer support
Informal support from peers and friend groups generally outranked other support services
such as counseling or seeking guidance from faculty members. Common descriptors regarding
peers and friend groups used by three participants included words such as an inner circle,
supportive, relatable, helpful, advantageous, and safe. Aside from the formal structure of the
Gay-Straight Alliance, peers and friends groups were seen as the first port of call when it came to
LGBTQ related issues.
Alex talked about, “the friends that I have who know who I am”, and the importance of
those who are close who understand. Fran and Mana were both very passionate about the
importance of peer support. Fran did not see counseling services as being a support service she
would necessarily seek out. She said that she knew such services existed and would feel
comfortable seeing a counselor but added that peer support would be her preference when
seeking help from others. She stated, “I think that it’s so much easier to ask for help from your
own peers than you know an adult, who maybe you’ve never met before, who you don’t know
like what their personal opinion is”. Fran’s primary need for support was met through peers and
principally through the Gay-Straight Alliance. She stated, “Whereas for me, I mean, I feel that
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

56
just having the support system and the space to be able to be open and discuss that the GSA
already provides, is sufficient for my needs”.
Mana brought a unique perspective to the study since it was her first year at the school,
having transferred from another international school in Asia, which had a very strong Gay-
Straight Alliance. Mana said if she were ever to have a problem, she would rather go to a peer as
opposed to a counselor in school. When asked why, she explained,
“I think that peers are more understanding of what I could potentially be going through.
Peers also have a better idea of what, I guess any sort of action is received by a student
body. For example it's quite easy for teachers to say, oh just ignore it or log off social
media … or report that person but it's very hard when you're actually someone going
through that experience. I think that peers know that and will give me valuable advice
that I could actually use and I would be willing to use in the context of being in such a
large group of teenagers. While adults wouldn't necessarily be able to give me that
advice from my experience”.
In contrast to the other three participants, Kyle did not talk about a preference of peer
support. He was the only participant to specifically reference teachers rather than peers. When
discussing peers, Kyle stated, “I’d say like a lot of the issues probably stem a lot from like my
peers”. While identifying the importance of peer support within the GSA, outside the student led
group, he perceived peers as being a barrier to his identity. He felt that there was a lot of ridicule
and dismissal of LGBTQ students at the school, especially for those students whose gender
expression was non-binary. He felt there was a pressure to conform or, “to just sort of like, hide
or blend in or not, not make your identity really that well known”. He personally felt it was
challenging making connections with other male students. He stated, “I can speak very
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

57
personally about this. Specifically with other, with other men, it's very difficult for me to
express my sexual orientation around other guys because like, just because of the very
heteronormative, hyper masculine standards and culture that's at ISEA”.
Conclusion
Two main themes emerged in regards to the first research question on other forms of
support for LGBTQ students. All four participants identified formal services such as counseling
however perceptions of whether they would access this service varied. Some participants felt
confidentiality was a concern, especially in regards to information sharing and parents. Two
participants identified school policy as being an important support for LGBTQ students however
their perceptions of policy at the school indicated room for growth. Overall, peer support
outweighed other forms of support, whether it be friend groups, other peers or those within their
Gay-Straight Alliance. The common thread in peer support was a common understanding of
what it meant to be LGBTQ and higher degree of comfort when turning to peers for support.
Key findings from all four participants strongly indicated the importance of community within
the Gay-Straight Alliance. The next section will focus on participant perception of the Gay-
Straight Alliance they attend.
Research Question 2: How do members of the GSA feel about the role the alliance plays in
helping them succeed in their academic and social-emotional well-being?
The second research question in this study aimed to understand member perceptions of
the role of the Gay-Straight Alliance plays in terms of their academic and social-emotional well-
being. The two themes, which emerged from the data analyzed on participant perceptions of the
Gay-Straight Alliance are:
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

58
• The Gay-Straight Alliance is the primary and most visible, safe space providing a venue
to be authentic, to share & learn, to mutually support other members. It allows members
to have a sense of community and belonging.
• The Gay-Straight Alliance helps members internally but outreach beyond the GSA at a
school and community level is limited.
The Gay-Straight Alliance: A safe, visible, empowering space to share and learn.
The four participants in this study all felt that their Gay-Straight Alliance was 1) a safe
space, 2) a venue through which GSA members are empowered both socially and emotionally,
and 3) a learning environment where members could share. The following section addresses the
three subsections of the first theme, which emerged on member perceptions of the GSA they
attend.
Safe space. All four participants were adamant that their Gay-Straight Alliance was their
primary mode of support at their school. It was described as the most visible space where one
could be comfortable being oneself. There was a very strong sense of community and a high
degree of trust among the members. It was a space to be safe where members felt a high degree
of comfort in being open.
Alex said it is of comfort knowing there is a safe space where everyone is in the same
situation. Alex stressed the importance of trust by emphasizing that no one in the group would
out anyone or discuss someone’s identity if they were not comfortable with it. Alex felt the Gay-
Straight Alliance was definitely the best visible, safe space that they knew off besides specific
counselors and some friend groups they were out to. When asked to expand on what safe meant,
Alex said, “Safe to express who I am. Safe to talk about my identity without feeling like I'm
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

59
going to be shot down for it”. Alex later emphasized the importance of trust among GSA
members, which underpinned the value of respect for members and their privacy. She added,
“Nobody outs you in GSA. They all respect your privacy because they have a certain
amount of secrecy that they all have because a lot of them are in GSA and out to the
school but not out to their parents”.
She concluded by stating members found it easier to talk about their identity with friends
or peers but not with their teachers or parents because she felt that in even this present day
environment, there were families who are, “very, very violently against it”.
Fran echoed similar perceptions of the Gay-Straight Alliance. As co-president, Fran
reaffirmed the values of safety, the trust members have worked to establish, all protected in the
knowledge that personal member information would always remain anonymous. She described
the GSA as being sufficient for her needs. Along with the other co-president, Kyle, she stated
she was comfortable, for the most part, with others in the school knowing they are associated
with the GSA (for activities where the club is promoted). For the majority of members,
however, what is often shared in the room, stays in the room. She explained the GSA is a space
where members can feel comfortable, adding that once a member steps outside the GSA,
especially someone who feels less secure in their identity or less safe, and steps out into regular
school community, they behave very differently.
Having a space where is it is permissible to be visible was also important to Fran. She
stated it was great to have a place where one is allowed to be visible and members have the
security that the people in the room will receive that visibility in a positive manner. Fran
concluded by stating the GSA was nonjudgmental space but also a place where being visible
provides safety in the literal sense. She stated,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

60
“I mean safe to feel unjudged but also safe in like a really literal safe sense. I think for a
lot of people, it varies but I think … sometimes the idea of visibility is synonymous with
like being a target for something and if you're visible at the GSA, you know everyone
else there is also standing up at the same time as you are and saying something about
their identity. So no one there is going to do something violent because of your visibility.
But I think for a lot of people, if they did that in another space, that would not be
necessarily true”.
Fran’s co-president, Kyle stated that safe spaces for LGBTQ students are extremely
important. He stated he was a minority in the GSA because he was out and accepted in his own
household. He added this was not the case for many members so having a safe space in school is
very important. Kyle felt that outside the GSA, there were not many spaces where one could feel
completely visible or free from any sort of judgment. He added there is also a pressure to
confirm to heteronormative standards in most public spaces at the school. This was not the case
with the GSA. Kyle felt the GSA was a safe space to be visible. He stated,
“Well as a member, before I was president it was a place of community. It was a safe
space. I never once felt ridiculed or mocked for … behaving feminine. I am very
feminine person. I was never once mocked or ridiculed while I was in the GSA and that's
the only place at school I can say that has been the case throughout my four years”.
Mana stated that the GSA was definitely a visible, safe space. She felt that there was a
contrast between how members cared for each other within the GSA and the culture of the school
community in general. She stated GSA members are, “a group of people who are openly willing
to support you and who care and who want to help you”.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

61
All four participants expressed consistently strong views that the Gay-Straight Alliance
was a safe space where a student could be open, visible, unjudged and cared for. One member
also felt that the GSA was a space where one could feel safe in the literal sense. The GSA
appears to be one of few spaces in the school, where members can feel such a sense of safety and
openness.
Social and emotional empowerment. All four participants acknowledged that through
their GSA, members mutually supported each other and without the space the GSA created, they
would be hard pressed to find the trust and help elsewhere. The GSA was a place they could be
authentic and, in turn, this made them feel socially and emotionally empowered.
Through out the four interviews mutual support of members was key. Alex described
how important the GSA was socially and how it had broadened the circle of friends for members.
The level of mutual support provided between the GSA members was strength of the GSA. Alex
stated, “You know so it makes a lot of a big difference socially, especially to know that there are
people out there who understand who I am and will support me and we can support each other”.
The GSA was a confidence builder. Emotionally, Alex felt more comfortable in terms of
identity, as asexual and gender fluid, “are really sidelined identities”. The members of the GSA,
however, accept people for who they are and they acknowledge, understand and support each
other. Fran reinforced the importance of mutual support for social and emotional well-being.
She elaborated, “you have a place to fall back on if you’re having a problem that’s LGBT related
and you can’t share it with your parents … you have a space that you can go and share it”. She
added that the GSA was an invisible mini community, where everyone is accepted. Fran also
stressed that since the GSA helped her in terms of the social and emotional aspects of her life,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

62
this also helped her academically. Having a community to fall back on, took away some of her
worries. She stated,
“You have a place to vent. It makes things a little bit easier because you don't have to be
juggling 10 different things to worry about at the same time … You have to a place to
feel like you're being supported emotionally and if that's not a concern then you can really
put all your focus on other things. I mean if you're emotionally distressed all the time
then you're not going to do very well academically”.
Social and emotional empowerment hinged on the inclusive and caring environment of
the GSA. Mana emphasized that the GSA was a huge support system where everyone was kind
and the ethos is one where members are there for anyone and always ready to help. Peer support
was again a factor in terms of trust. Mana explained that,
“when you look for help with adults or administration, it feels sort of disconnected and
distant. I find they don’t quite understand what it feels like to be a queer teen in this age
of social media and sort of increasing competitiveness”.
Over and over, the use of the term mutual support from peers in the GSA was a consistent
comment made by all four participants. Members repeatedly mentioned the GSA as being the
primary place where members could be authentic, which in turn led to greater self esteem.
Empowerment through authenticity. The Gay-Straight Alliance also empowered
members both socially and emotionally because it was noted to be the primary place where
members could be themselves. The participants reported that the GSA was a place where they
could proudly out and this, in turn cultivated a feeling of safety.
Alex stated the GSA was “definitely the best visible, safe space”, other than specific
counselors or some friend groups. Fran was more adamant and described the GSA as the most
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

63
accessible support at the school. She explained that for some members, the GSA is “the only
source of visibility that they have”. Fran said that she was out with one parent but for many
other members, they really could not go to their parents, as home was often the least visible
space. She added that the GSA is, “like first and last thing on the list of places that they can go
and feel open”.
Openness was a recurrent comment made by the participants, which in turn led to a
feeling of empowerment. Alex stated the mutual support was a major strength of the club and
described how members had helped with the process of coming out. All participants emphasized
the importance for all members to feel comfortable and the need for the club to be inclusive and
respectful. Fran described the GSA by stating:
“Well I think just having a space where you can talk about these things really openly and
without much of a filter because you're aware that the people in that room, know where
you're coming from or relate to what your, to your experiences”.
Fran stated that the GSA played a very impactful role in her life at the school. She perceived the
GSA to be like group therapy. She stated that the GSA was a space where members could feel
more open and could get a glimpse into what life would be like when they are older. She felt
there was nowhere else members could feel that way. She concluded by saying,
“Depending on the topics, you know people laugh, people cry. I don't think there's any
other club or any other space where people really feel comfortable doing that and kind of
like baring their souls. And I mean it's sad. I wish that there was more spaces like that
and I wish that people could feel like they could do that at home. But the GSA I think is
really important to our members. I think if it wasn't there, their lives would be much
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

64
more more difficult. I think my life would have been much more difficult if I hadn't
gotten involved.”
The need to be open and authentic was a positive attribute of the GSA. Other participants talked
about how the GSA provided the need for a community of like-minded people. GSA members
were described as caring, supportive and non-judgmental, who looked out for one another. The
fact that members could be open about themselves was strength of the GSA. One participant
described the GSA as, “one of biggest services” for LGBTQ students at the school. Another
added the GSA as a huge support service. The GSA was a space where members can feel
comfortable being themselves, expressing thoughts and feelings, and mutually supporting one
another through shared experiences.
Place to share and learn. The final and final component of the first theme to emerge on
the Gay-Straight Alliance is educational component of the student led club. All four participants
talked about how their GSA was a place to share and learn from each other. This shared learning
was another avenue through which members felt supported, both socially and emotionally.
Alex stated that the GSA is an emotional support group where members have taught Alex
how to navigate conversations with people outside the GSA on matters regarding identify and
gender fluidity. Through the acquisition of these skills, Alex had learned how to express gender
identity with other people, things that, “I wouldn’t know if I hadn’t gone”. Learning was a two
way street, which occurred through shared experiences. Members give Alex tips and tricks and,
in turn, Alex reciprocates.
Structured learning was created through purposeful selection of topics, led by the various
members. As co-presidents, both Fran and Kyle talked about topics and themes they had
organized for member discussion. Topics were varied, ranging from coming out to navigating
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

65
challenging situations such as parental opposition. Shared learning in a non-judgmental
environment was important. Fran talked about the importance of being open to discuss topics,
“without much of a filter”. This openness comes from an awareness of shared experiences with
other members. Fran grew excited at the prospect that at least once a week, she gets to go into
this space and talk with like-minded people who are equally as passionate on topics such as
LGBT representation in the media. She stated such openness was in contrast to outside the GSA
where people either would not care or would roll their eyes. Within the GSA, being safe to share
and learn from others was also paramount. Fran concluded by saying,
“And also safe in the sense that you're safe to share the things that you want to share. And
at the very least be understood when you're saying that. Not everyone might like 100
percent agree with what you're saying but they'll understand where you're coming from
and will not judge you so harshly for what you're saying”.
Organized topics for discussion were an integral part of learning for members of the
GSA. One participant, Kyle, stressed the importance of learning about how LGBTQ people are
portrayed in the media and the need for members to learn about more positive aspects of LGBTQ
representation in society. These organized topics led to group discussion where members could
learn from others through shared experiences. Mana felt that the sharing of personal experiences
was the best form of learning. She described the GSA as a conversation group, “where people
share their thoughts on certain topics … or we address external topics when we learn about it”.
She said the learning, which occurs through presentations organized by the club leaders, often is
a springboard for further conversations.
While all four participants agreed the GSA was a venue to share and learn, this learning
was internal and limited to the confines of the GSA itself. Activities, which aimed to educate the
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

66
broader school community appeared to be limited and all four participants talked about how the
GSA could do more to advocate and inform the wider school community on LGBTQ related
issues. This led to the next theme, which emerged on perceptions of the GSA; that of advocacy.
The GSA and advocacy. The second theme to emerge on member perceptions of the
GSA and how it helps them socially, emotionally and academically was centered on advocacy. I
found that the participants generally acknowledged the Gay-Straight Alliance helps members
internally but outreach beyond the GSA at the school and community level was limited.
Literature suggests that while GSAs may act as a safe space for members, GSAs can also be a
primary vehicle for raising awareness of LGBTQ issues in the wider school community, which
can challenge the norms and expectations of schools, which may often underlie harassment or
discrimination (Griffin et al., 2004). A common finding among the four participants of this
study was that while they all agreed the GSA they attended provided a high degree of social and
emotional support to members with the GSA, it could do more to advocate at the school or
community level. The participants felt that this broader advocacy would do more to improve the
well-being for LGBTQ students at the school.
Alex felt that while the GSA had its greatest impact on members, there were many who
did not know about the GSA, did not attend and therefore would not benefit from what a GSA
can offer. Alex suggested that those GSA members who were comfortable with their own
identity could offer presentations to the broader school community on topics such as the use of
they/them pronouns for non-binary genders. Such outreach information sessions could then
allow those students who may identify with these topics to not feel alone and be more
comfortable with who they are. Alex added that,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

67
“It would help them to have a better understanding of it. I think it would be helpful if we
gave info to the entire community. Whereas right now, we give a lot of good information
to everyone who’s involved (in the GSA) but not people who are outside of it”.
Fran also felt that the support enjoyed within the GSA does not necessarily leave the room and,
“enter into the regular school community”. She described the GSA as an “isolated space” and
one that “feels like a separate world from the rest of the school”.
In order to address this issue head on, both Fran and Kyle cited a collaborative activity
with students for political activism, where they aimed to survey all students who may have
experienced various forms of bigotry or prejudice at the school. Fran saw this work as being
important. She stated that “it’s such a weird time that we in”, where many people perceive
LGBTQ rights to not be a problem any more because gay marriage is legalized. She stated,
“But there’s so much work to still be done and there's so much that still goes on and that
needs to be addressed. And people just like aren't aware of that. And I think that the kind
of first step that we're taking as in the GSA to kind of take our work outside of the GSA
and into the wider school community, is just to make these problems available for people
to look at and know about”.
Mana had the added perspective of being able to compare her current GSA at ISEA to her
prior school. She felt that the GSA at her previous school was more visible and more involved in
producing content that informed all students in the school community. Mana did not view the
GSA at ISEA as an advocacy group. She perceived it to be a conversation group where people
share their thoughts on certain topics, guided by club leaders. She stated,
“But I don't think that it actually has sort of an impact in advocating for change within the
school environment because we don't address the school specifically, more the
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

68
individuals within that club and the issue outside of ISEA. For example last week we
talked about LGBT representation in the media. So that's connected to us but
disconnected from our relationship and the community”.
While she found the format of conversation group to be fun, informative and extremely
interesting, she did not see the GSA as being a vehicle for change beyond the boundaries of the
group.
Conclusion
All four participants acknowledged the importance of the support the GSA provided, both
to themselves and to the members who attended the club. The GSA provided a safe space and a
venue where members could share and learn and mutually support each other both socially and
emotionally. The GSA was the primary mode of LGBTQ support for all four participants. As
Fran stated, there really was no other club like it at the school. The GSA provided a trusted
network of like-minded people and was a safety net where members would not feel alone. It was
also a space where one could be authentic and open. All participants felt, however, that the GSA
had the potential to be more of an advocacy group, educating the wider school community on
LGBTQ issues. While the GSA was taking tentative steps in this direction, I found that the
participants felt the club could do more to educate the broader school community. The
perception outreach beyond the GSA would have a positive effect on the well-being of LGBTQ
students. The theme of educating the broader school community was a dominant theme in the
last research question where participants were asked to envision an ideal school in terms of other
support services for LGBTQ students.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

69
Research Question 3: What other kinds of support services would members of the GSA like
to see at their school?
The third and final research question in this study aimed to understand what other support
services would members of the GSA like to see at this school. The basis for this question was to
have the participants imagine what would an inclusive LGBTQ school look and feel like in terms
of support. The inspiration for this question comes from Solution-focused therapy methodology,
which is future focused but also has a component where people are asked to imagine an ideal
future (see What is Solution-focused Therapy?, n.d.). The three themes, which emerged from
this final research question, are:
• There is a need to address existing barriers through the creation of more inclusive
practices for LGBTQ students.
• There is a need to design and deliver more LGBTQ educational programs aimed at
different sectors of the school community.
• There is a need to create and implement school policies, which are more inclusive and
will better protect LGBTQ students at the school.
Inclusive practices
The first theme to emerge from the final research question was participants generally felt
the school needed to focus on more inclusive practices. In order to achieve this goal, participants
talked about targeting barriers, the importance of positive LGBTQ role models for LGBTQ and
how to create a shift in the culture towards a more inclusive school.
Target barriers. Key findings from the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network’s
(GLSEN) 2015 National School Climate Survey demonstrate that numerous barriers exist in
schools in the United States for LGBT students. These barriers include but are not limited to
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

70
policy, restrictions in students expressing themselves as LGBT, limited inclusion of LGBT topics
or ideas in extracurricular activities or limitations on the use of preferred pronouns or bathrooms
for transgender students (Kosciw et al., 2016). All four participants raised the topic of barriers
at The International School of East Asia and a strong desire to see targeted interventions aimed at
decreasing or dissolving such barriers.
Barriers mentioned included areas of the curriculum, a lack of visibility outside the GSA,
the inability to express oneself openly as LGBTQ, the lack of LGBTQ representation or open
communication on LGBTQ related services and an overall casual attitude to all LGBTQ related
matters at the school. Both Alex and Kyle cited a life skills course at the school as being overtly
heteronormative. In the sexual education class Alex attends, she stated, “they use a ton of
heteronormative” examples, focusing predominantly on male-female relationships. Alex felt
marginalized students would feel sidelined and, “would probably like to know some things just
to be educated the same, with all the straight kids”. Kyle reiterated these sentiments stating
sexual education courses at the school are not good where LGBTQ are concerned. He expanded
this to other mainstream courses, stating, “in the curriculum, I don't really think there's any
emphasis on LGBTQ issues or history or anything”.
Visibility outside the Gay-Straight Alliance was something the participants wanted more
of. Fran described how she and Kyle were, for the most part, comfortable to advertise the GSA
at the club fair and sit at the GSA booth, “with like rainbows painted on our faces”. However
she said for a lot of members, that level of visibility was outside their comfort zone. Attitudes
towards LGBTQ people were a real issue. Fran felt there were a lot of students who were not
supportive towards LGBT students and that anyone who was LGBTQ would be acutely aware of
this fact. She stated that,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

71
“being kind of aware that there were going to be a good handful of people around me that
are not going to … appreciate the visibility kind of stops me from doing that and kind of
pulls me back and says OK maybe we just be safer and better for everyone if I just liked
zipped”.
Mana also cited visibility as an issue at the school, recalling how she stopped wearing a rainbow
pin shortly after arriving at ISEA due to negative reactions. She stated, “so I remember
processing that and sort of taking off the pin”. Mana elaborated that she did not feel unsafe in
the sense that someone would physically hurt her but that there was, “this overwhelming sense of
judgment and sort of this feeling that oh, it's not quite, you know, as accepting. Kyle also talked
about how he felt the school would not be open to same sex couples attending prom and how the
uniform dress code would probably not be able to deal with a male student wanted to wear a skirt
to school. This tendency for the participants to modify their behavior was often built around a
fear certain members of the school community would not be so accepting. There was a general
perception it was better to conform.
Role models. Kyle was the only participant to talk about the need for positive
representation within the school. He recognized the fact that the school did have some LGBTQ
faculty although he felt this representation declined into the senior school. However he believed
positive LGBTQ role models should not be limited to teachers. Kyle stated, “I think there should
be more LGBTQ representation within the faculty, within administration … and that would be
very well known”. He felt the school could do more to present positive role models throughout
all aspects of the school’s media. He stated, “like I can't really think of the last time somebody
from the GSA was like featured in anything that was like explicitly showing them as like a queer
person, like a positive way”. He wanted to see the school acknowledge LGBTQ students and
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

72
faculty in a positive way and for that to be very visible. Kyle also saw a need for an explicit
LGBTQ counseling service within the already existing counseling department. He envisioned
counselors who would be trained and dedicated to, “deal in helping students with this type of
thing”.
Shift in culture. All four participants called for a shift in culture at the school. While
some members acknowledged the school as being supportive, there was a general feeling that the
school could do more. Alex felt that the school was supportive but felt asexual and aromatic
identities were marginalized because others would sometimes tell Alex such identities are not
real. Alex felt it was a struggle for the school because certain families have, “these beliefs
ingrained in their heads” and the school is not able to change those views. Kyle focused on both
policy and the culture of the students. He stated he would like to see a cultural change in his
fellow students regarding what was acceptable and what was not. He hoped that the environment
created within the GSA, could be applied elsewhere. He said,
“I would like to paint the identity of ISEA in general, in all aspects of it, to be a LGBTQ
friendly place, like an accepting place. I'd like the entire school to be a safe space, like the
GSA, if was possible”.
Mana was more focused on students and their use of language. She wished that people would
call others out for implicit bullying. She added, “I wish people, if something bothered them or if
they observed something they found wrong, they would just say something about it”. Education,
therefore, was seen as a prominent solution to creating a shift in culture. This led to the second
theme from the final research question that the school needs to design and deliver more LGBTQ
educational programs aimed at different sectors of the school community. Alex summarized it
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

73
well by saying, “Just education, in general, is very important especially for more marginalized
identities like mine”.
Awareness through education
All four participants felt that the school should be delivering educational programs aimed
at different sectors of the school community. Target audiences included students, faculty and
parents.
Educating students and faculty. It is believed that an inclusive curriculum can instill a
belief in the intrinsic worth of all individuals. Schools that include LGBT related issues in the
curriculum in a positive manner may make LGBTQ students feel more valued as well as
promoting more positive feelings about LGBTQ issues and people among their peers (Kosciw et
al., 2016). All four participants saw a need for a more inclusive curriculum at their school.
They also felt that the GSA could do more to educate all students at the school on LGBTQ
related topics.
Alex felt language was an important issue and there should be talk as a whole school on
personal pronouns. It would also be beneficial to let teachers know that there are students who
are not binary gender. Alex felt the school could use existing services such as advisory times or
assemblies where talks could be held on LGBTQ related matters. The goal would be to help
inform others and raise awareness of LGBTQ topics. Alex added,
“Just something like that so that the whole community, people who are questioning,
people who know who they are but want to support, or people who are not yet
comfortable to be out enough, that kind of thing, so everyone could be comfortable and
know and be educated on the same level type of thing”.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

74
Fran saw the middle school years as being central to raising an awareness of one’s identity and
LGBTQ related issues. She stated that is a time when people begin questioning their identity and
it is also a period when Middle School students experiment with language so interventions to
teach students about equity and respect would help. She also felt this was a crucial time in which
to raise an awareness to students that LGBTQ people exist. Fran was very adamant that LGBTQ
topics should not be silenced and should be more openly discussed at larger school venues. She
stated, “like holding an assembly and that's just about slurs or like why you shouldn't bully
people for their sexual orientation”. Fran felt that without an open, honest dialogue on LGBTQ
related topics, the school leaves students who may identify as LGBTQ feeling confused and
worried about their identity. Fran stated,
“We have students who today identify as gay or lesbian or bisexual or et cetera, but they
have to spend their entire late elementary and middle school lives being really confused
and worried about their identity or feeling like they were wrong or out of place or that
there was something wrong with them”.
She concluded by saying it was sad that LGBT students should have to resort to searching for
answers by themselves, rather than be taught the information on how to lead healthier lives
where they are comfortable being themselves. Kyle also felt that an inclusive LGBTQ
curriculum should occur across all subject areas, not just in subjects such as sexual education. He
stated, “I would really like make an emphasis on having life skills at ISEA be taught intelligently
and with a respect to who is being taught to”. Kyle felt that inclusive education should be central
and address issues on racism, sexism, xenophobia, discrimination and all areas of bigotry. He
believed learning should focus on how schools can work to minimize such practices and create a
more inclusive environment.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

75
Educating parents. All four participants talked about the importance of educating
parents on LGBTQ issues. Two factors from Meyer’s (2003) minority stress model emerged
when the participants broadly discussed GSA member-parent relationships. These were
concealment and the fear of rejection. I noted that a consistent concern was the view that many
GSA members were not out to their parents. As co-president, Fran discussed her own
relationship with her parents as well as those of other GSA members. When describing GSA
members in general, she said many acted differently when they attended the GSA compared to
when the members were in the broader school community. In terms of being out, Fran shared
that more than half of the people in her GSA were not out to their parents. She stated, “very few
people are really, really out to, like everyone … their parents, their peers, very few people. Kyle
who was also co-president, also explained that very few GSA members were out to their family.
He stated, “I'm in the minority in the GSA where in I'm like out and accepted in my own
household. That is not really the case for a lot of other people”. Alex reiterated the reason why
trust was so important within the GSA was because many members are out to the school but not
to their parents. From these responses, I found that the participants felt parent education to be a
step towards a more positive environment for LGBTQ students, especially in the home
environment.
The need for parent education at the school was build around the perception that not only
would it provide knowledge, but that it would also help raise an awareness for all parents, on
what it mean to be LGBTQ. This awareness would lead to a greater understanding. Mana
stated, “So I think if they're informed, if they’re knowledgeable, if they're more aware … then it
would be really important to feeling more protected at the school knowing … more parents are
realizing what you may be going through”. Kyle also addressed the lack of knowledge held by
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

76
parents on LGBTQ issues. He felt that a lot of parents were ignorant and just did not know basic
LGBTQ related terminology or related issues. He felt education was important because he
believed that not knowing is what leads to maliciousness and bigotry. He even suggested such
education should be mandatory for parents to help bridge the gap for those students who did
identify as LGBTQ. He stressed that many GSA members generally were not comfortable at
home. He added that members often, “censor themselves at home because they're very wary of
their parents reactions and they're thinking about college and losing their education and all that
… I feel that's where a lot of grief for the LGBTQ community comes from”.
All four participants expressed the view that parent education on LGBTQ issues should
be high on the school’s agenda, if it was serious about inclusivity for all students. Fran admitted,
however, that parent education is complicated. She added that, “I don't think that anybody is
going to be able to like snap their fingers and just like change their parents entire world view”.
However, she felt it important to remind parents that there always exists the chance that their
child may identify as LGBTQ but that what matters is the, “happiness and safety of your child”.
Transparent school policy on LGBTQ issues
A final theme some participants raised focused on the need to have a supportive
administration together with school policies, which affirmed LGBTQ rights. Not all participants
talked about this issue. Alex considered that the school was already very supportive. Fran
referred to the importance of educating various sectors of the school community in order to raise
an awareness of LGBTQ issues and ensuring the topic is an open not silenced one.
Kyle and Mana, however, specifically discussed the importance of administrative support
as being central to promoting LGBTQ rights at the school. When discussing the need for
positive LGBTQ role models in the faculty and throughout the public profile of the school, Kyle
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

77
felt that it all goes back to the important role administration plays. He did perceive a power
struggle between the direction of the school and parental pressure. On policy, Kyle wanted to
see the school take a more progressive stance on LGBTQ issues. He believed administration
should have specific policies when dealing with homophobia, trans phobia and queer phobia
among the student body. In terms of current support from administration on LGBTQ issues,
Kyle stated, “I personally think that with the administration in general, policy as a whole, they
tend to be kind of ignored or like very downplayed”. Kyle wanted increased LGBT
representation in the faculty. He believed that was the easiest thing administration, either at
ISEA or at schools in general, could do to support LGBTQ students.
Mana believed the school should have clear policies on how they support LGBTQ
students. She felt that policy that is clearly communicated to both students and parents would
translate into LGBTQ students feeling safer and that currently where the school stands on
LGBTQ issues is unclear. Ideally, she felt there should be a stronger focus on transgender
students with a push to have gender-neutral bathrooms. Mana considered administrative support
to be crucial. Reflecting on her previous school, where LGBTQ policy was more front and
center, Mana felt that responsibility for a shift in culture can not just come from the students
alone because, “it doesn't pick up enough steam to create enough change and for people to listen
to them”. Mana stressed that effective change needed the outward support from both
administration and faculty.
Conclusion
The final research question targeted member perceptions on how could the International
School of East Asia better support LGBTQ students. Targeting barriers, which increased the
visibility of the school’s LGBTQ community was seen as a first step. Only one participant
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

78
talked about the importance of having positive LGBTQ roles models at the school. Educating all
students, faculty and parents was a second major theme that emerged from this question.
Participants felt strongly about how educating everyone on LGBTQ issues would raise
awareness and lead to greater well-being for LGBTQ students. Finally, two participants
identified school policy as being an important backbone in order to proactively support all
students at the school.
Summary
I found that seven major themes emerged from the data analyzed on the interviews held
with each of the four participants of this study. The first two themes that emerged from the first
research question, were centered on member perceptions of other support services for LGBTQ
students at the school. Member perceptions of these services were varied however there was a
general trend towards favoring peer or friend groups over more formal services such as
counseling. There was a lower level of trust in respect to accessing counseling services at the
school with the main concern being confidentiality and parents. School policy was also
identified as being an important mechanism of support for LGTBQ students; however, there was
a perception that current policy could be improved to better meet the needs of this subset of
students at the school.
The second research question focused on member perceptions of the role of the Gay-
Straight Alliance played in helping students succeed in their academic and social emotional well-
being. Two major themes emerged from this question. I found that the alliance is the primary
place of support for the students who participate in this club. The GSA was perceived to be one
of few visible, safe spaces at the school, where members felt comfortable, could be authentic,
could share & learn and be mutually supportive. The second theme revealed that while the GSA
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

79
certainly supported members internally, the ability of the club in terms of outreach beyond the
GSA was limited. There was a strong perception that the GSA could do more at the school and
community level.
The final research question focused on what other kinds of support services could the
school provide to better support LGBTQ students. The first theme showed that members felt
strongly about the need to first address barriers and shift towards more inclusive practices. The
next theme had a strong focus on the importance of educating different groups of the school
community on LGBTQ issues to raise awareness and help all members of the school community
better understand the needs of LGBTQ people. Parental education was seen as being paramount
as student-family relationships for LGBTQ students was seen as an area of need, which would
benefit from school-led educational initiatives. Finally, inclusive school policy was identified, as
being central in providing an effective shift in culture and this must be a collaborative effort
between administration and the rest of the school.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

80
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of the needs of a subset of
students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning (LGBTQ). The study
explored the perceptions of those students who participate in a Gay-Straight Alliance at The
International School of East Asia, in order to gain a better understanding of their school
experience in terms of support systems and structures. The study focused on the perceptions of a
select group of members, who regularly attended a Gay-Straight Alliance at The International
School of East Asia. Three research questions, which underpinned this study were (1) what
perceptions did these students hold of support systems, (2) how did members of the Gay-Straight
Alliance feel about the role the alliance plays in their daily life, and (3) what other kinds of
support services would members of the GSA like to see at their school? This qualitative study
employed a case study approach. Sampling was purposeful with four members of the selected
Gay-Straight Alliance volunteering to participate. The four participants were interviewed
separately. This chapter will share a summary of findings, implications for practice and
recommendations for future research.
Summary of Findings
An analysis of the data collected from the four semi-structured interviews provides
insight into the perceptions of the four participants from the selected Gay-Straight Alliance
(GSA) at The International School of East Asia (ISEA) on issues such as support, the role the
alliance plays and what could the school do more of in order to better support gender and
orientation diversity. From the analysis of the data, seven major themes emerged regarding
support, the role of the GSA, and future steps towards better supporting LGBTQ issues at the
school. These seven themes are:
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

81
1. While formal support systems, such as counseling services and school policy, were
identified as forms of support, they are perceived to be secondary along with a low
level of trust into how supportive these services are for LGBTQ students.
2. Less formal support services such as friends/peers are perceived to be preferential to
more formal services as they carry a higher level of trust.
3. The Gay-Straight Alliance is the primary and most visible, safe space providing a
venue to be authentic, to share & learn, to mutually support other members. It allows
members to have a sense of community and belonging.
4. The Gay-Straight Alliance helps members internally but outreach beyond the GSA at
a school and community level is limited.
5. There is a need to address existing barriers through the creation of more inclusive
practices for LGBTQ students.
6. There is a need to design and deliver more LGBTQ educational programs aimed at
different sectors of the school community.
7. There is a need to create and implement school policies, which are more inclusive and
will better protect LGBTQ students at the school.
The first and second theme focuses perceptions on other modes of support for LGBTQ
students at the school. Formal systems such as counseling and school policy were identified as
being important support systems. However, these services were generally perceived to be
secondary as opposed to support from peers, friend groups or the Gay-Straight Alliance. Support
from teachers was noted as important but, again, peers, friends groups or the Gay-Straight
Alliance ranked ahead in terms of whom the members would turn to if they had a problem,
needed advice or support. While school counselors were noted to be a vital service, and some
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

82
members praised efforts by counselors in displaying visible LGBTQ signage, going to see a
counselor was seen as secondary, in comparison to peers and the support the alliance provided.
Some members noted trust issues as a concern, in terms of confidentiality with parents.
Goodrich, Harper, Luke and Singh (2013) discuss the challenges of confidentiality for school
counselors when working with LGBTQ youth. They state, “counselors should be aware of
confidentiality and privacy, fundamental for students who are either still exploring or not yet
ready to disclose their identity to parents and others in their lives” (p. 310). The need to balance
confidentiality and privacy of students while understanding the legal and inherent rights of
parents or guardians is highlighted in the ethical standards of the American School Counselors
Association (American School Counselor Association, 2016). The concern expressed by two
participants in this study regarding privacy and parents would suggest more could be done in
order to understand the needs of LGBTQ students in regards to confidentiality issues and the fear
of concealment and possible rejection (Meyer, 2003). Possible solutions to this issue will be
discussed later in this chapter when implications for the school are addressed.
Less formal support services such as friends/peers are perceived to be preferential to
more formal services as they carry a higher level of trust. Allen, Kern, Vella-Brodrick, Hattie
and Waters (2016) identified 10 themes that influence school belonging during the adolescence
phase of school. Peer support was one of 10 themes, which help students create a stronger sense
of belonging. The importance of peer support in this study strongly indicates how socialization
plays a major role in LGBTQ student well-being (Poteat, Heck, Yoshikawa, & Calzo, 2016;
Fetner & Elafros, 2015). What was evident in this study was that participants preferred to turn to
a peer first, with adult support, while seen as being essential, being deemed as a secondary
option. Social support, be it peers, friend groups or adults, is clearly key as this support is what
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

83
can provide a buffer to prejudice and lead to better well being for LGBTQ students (Kwon,
2013).
The third theme from this study affirmed the strong role the Gay-Straight Alliance played
in providing support to GSA members. In the knowledge that socialization plays a vital role in
well-being of LGBTQ students (Poteat, Heck, Yoshikawa, & Calzo, 2016; Fetner & Elafros,
2015), the role of the Gay-Straight Alliance at The International School of East Asia (ISEA) is
central to providing a venue for socialization.
All four participants were adamant in their perceptions of the role their Gay-Straight
Alliance (GSA) played in supporting them socially, emotionally as well as academically. First,
all four participants identified the GSA as the primary safe venue at the school. The participants
frequently employed the word, ‘comfortable’, indicating that for other members, this was one
place in the school where members could be authentic. This finding compares with other
studies, which affirm the need for schools to foster safe and inclusive spaces for LGTBQ
students and how a GSA can assist in this process (Fetner, Elafros, Bortolin & Drechsler, 2012;
Griffin, Lee, Waugh & Beyer, 2004; Lee, 2002; Steck & Perry, 2016; Walls, Kane & Wisneski,
2010).
Second, the Gay-Straight Alliance was perceived as a place to not only mutually support
its members, but also a venue to share and learn. This provided a strong sense of community and
belonging within the GSA. This finding aligns with Macgillivray’s (2007) definition on the
purpose of Gay-Straight Alliances. He suggests Gay-Straight Alliances allows students to,
“develop their social skills, get support and information that is age-appropriate, and meet others
with similar interests, which helps end the social and emotional isolation some LGBT teens
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

84
experience” (p.7). All four participants cited these key factors when describing the role their
alliance played in their daily school life at ISEA.
While all four participants identified the strong role the Gay-Straight Alliance played in
supporting members within the group, the fourth theme of this study indicates members
perceived the outreach of the GSA at a broader school and community level to be somewhat
limited. The participants felt the GSA could do more to promote LGBTQ issues beyond the
boundaries of the alliance itself. While small pockets of outreach were identified, it was
perceived to be limited and the general consensus was the GSA could do more in order to be a
vehicle to promote and support LGBTQ awareness throughout the school and the broader school
community. The findings of this study suggest that this particular Gay-Straight Alliance at The
International School of East Asia acts predominantly as a safe space and support group for
members. The goal of a GSA being a primary vehicle for raising an awareness of LGBTQ issues
in the wider school community is an important consideration for the school since research has
indicated outreach awareness can challenge norms and expectations, which may often underpin
harassment or discrimination for LGBTQ students (Griffin et al., 2004). The findings from this
study would suggest that while GSAs can provide safe spaces for their members, they are not as
effective in terms of challenging broader heteronormative norms (Griffin et al., 2004; Steck and
Perry, 2016; Watson et al, 2010). The implications of this finding for The International School
of East Asia and other international schools will be discussed later.
The final three themes, which emerged from the data collected, were centered around
what else could the school be doing, to better support LGBTQ students. The fifth theme, which
emerged from the data was the need to identify and be aware of barriers to inclusive practices at
the school. Barriers mentioned included areas of the curriculum, a lack of visibility outside the
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

85
GSA, the inability to express oneself openly as LGBTQ, the lack of LGBTQ representation or
open communication on LGBTQ related services and an overall casual attitude to all LGBTQ
related matters at the school. This finding indicates that barriers are a major stumbling block
towards more inclusive practices at schools. Data collected from the Gay, Lesbian and Straight
Education Network’s (GLSEN) 2015 National School Climate Survey demonstrate that
numerous barriers exist in schools in the United States for LGBT students. These barriers
include but are not limited to policy, restrictions in students expressing themselves as LGBT,
limited inclusion of LGBT topics or ideas in extracurricular activities or limitations on the use of
preferred pronouns or bathrooms for transgender students (Kosciw et al., 2016). The
participants of this study raised similar themes predominantly associated with a need to have
greater LGBTQ visibility throughout the school, especially in areas of curriculum, visible role
models and a desire to create a shift in culture towards inclusivity. Greater visibility is important
when schools are striving for equity when supporting the LGBTQ community (Cerezo &
Bergfield, 2003).
Education was the sixth theme to emerge, identified by the participants as a means of
better supporting LGBTQ students at the school. Students, faculty and parents were seen as the
main targets. Data collected from the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network’s (GLSEN)
2015 National School Climate Survey indicates inclusive curriculums can instill a belief in the
intrinsic worth of all individuals and schools that include LGBT related topics in the curriculum
in a positive manner, may cultivate a culture of positivity and greater value among LGBTQ
students. This positive culture can influence all members of a school community, accounting for
a greater sense of well being for LGBTQ students among their peers (Kosciw et al., 2016).
Parental education was perceived as being paramount in creating better well-being for LGBTQ
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

86
students. The participants felt that helping educate parents on LGBTQ issues would in turn raise
awareness and improve understanding for any student identifying as LGBTQ. The topic of
parents and coming out highlights the important role this Gay-Straight Alliance plays in the well-
being of all its members. All four participants were adamant in the vital role the GSA played in
providing support. The participants also talked about how few of the members were out to their
families. This finding is consistent with the need for schools to have available LGBTQ related
support systems in place, when home may not be safe or supported, since many LGBTQ students
may not be comfortable turning to family for support (Macgillivray, 2007).
The final theme, which emerged, was that some participants also felt school policy
should help guide and shape support for LGBTQ students. These perceptions support prior
literature, which shows when institutions do not address the needs of their LGBTQ population;
this may result in exclusion and invisibility (Grayson, 1987; Tierney, 1997; Tierney & Dilley,
1998; Meyer, 2007).
Implications
This study focused on four members of a Gay-Straight Alliance at The International
School of East Asia and their perceptions of support for LGBTQ students at the school. It is
evident that the four participants of this study feel that their Gay-Straight Alliance plays a vital
role in supporting students who attend this club. Through the strong peer support and trust,
which is apparent in this alliance, members appear to be comfortable in openly discussing a wide
range of LGBTQ related topics. The ability to be able to discuss such topics in a safe and visible
environment suggests members are able to tackle some of the stress processes as outlined in
Meyer’s (2003) stress model. It would also suggest that the social network evident among
members in this Gay-Straight Alliance does act as a buffer to prejudice, which in turn leads to
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

87
greater well-being (Kwon, 2013). The four participants certainly feel that their Gay-Straight
Alliance provides a safe, visible space, where members feel comfortable to be themselves and
this aligns with Fetner, Elafros, Bortolin and Drechsler’s (2012) conceptual framework of safe
spaces.
Considering the geographical location of the school and the associated socio-cultural and
political nature of the school’s setting, it is highly commendable that the school runs several
Gay-Straight Alliances. I found that the four participants of this study feel very strongly about
their alliance and the support it provides. It is therefore imperative that the school continues to
ensure the viability and support of such clubs. In the spirit of this support, I have also learned
from the four participants, that the school should take note of the following implications derived
from the themes that emerged. They are (a) provide further specialized training for counselors on
LGBTQ issues and/or consider the hiring of a counselor who openly identifies as LGBTQ; (b)
continue to cultivate aspects of outreach by the Gay-Straight Alliance beyond the internal
boundaries of the club itself to the broader school community; (c) examine and study barriers to
inclusivity including school policy; and, (d) consider the creation, design and deliver of
educational programs to raise LGBTQ awareness, specifically parent education.
Counseling and LGBTQ support. The International School of East Asia offers a very
strong counseling program throughout all levels of the school. Some of the participants of this
study identified this fact and praised the school on the level of services provided by counselors.
Despite this level of support, however, the findings of this study would suggest further work be
done on exploring and understanding the specialized needs for students identifying as LGBTQ
and the implications this has for counselors. I found that some participants did express a concern
regarding confidentiality and seeing a counselor. This concern was directly related to sexual
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

88
identity. The participants did talk about stress processes from Meyer’s minority stress model
(2003), in particular that of hiding and concealment. While the Gay-Straight Alliance does act as
a buffer, it is evident more consideration needs to be given on how counselors can better tailor
their services to the LGBTQ community or those students who are still exploring. Counselors
can be effective allies but there may exist a need to assess counselors on their knowledge on
issues to do with sexual diversity (see Bidel, 2012 and the use of the Sexual Orientation
Counselor Competency scale, SOCCs).
Gay-Straight Alliance outreach. The participants of this study all identified the strong
role the Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) plays in supporting members internally. This is an area of
strength. An area of growth was that the GSA could do more do promote an awareness of
LGBTQ issues in the school. One participant noted that more could also be done to promote the
GSA in terms of the school’s media presence, noting no one GSA member had ever been
profiled in either a school magazine or online. The implications for the school are that while
running a Gay-Straight Alliance does provide a safe space for GSA members, the importance of
visibility and the creation of visible, inclusive spaces are also required to ensure, not only safe
environments but equal representation (Cerezo & Bergfield, 2013). The participants of this
study felt the GSA could do more to raise awareness. An important question for the school to
pose is who is responsible for ensuring opportunities exist for increased outreach? Research has
demonstrated that administrators can play key roles supporting school based resources such as
Gay-Straight Alliances, when they take the responsibility to set the tone of inclusion (Steck &
Perry, 2016). Aside from Gay-Straight Alliances, studies have demonstrated the importance of
inclusive curricular resources, supportive educators and comprehensive bullying/harassment
policies that create a positive school climate for LGBTQ students. School administrators,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

89
however, may also play an important role, not only as caring adults, but because they can set the
tone and lead on specific policies that may affect school climate (Kosciw et al., 2016). The
school organization, as research suggests, would be best placed to lead the charge in advocating
for all students. One participant particularly lamented a lack of direction from the school in
regards to LGBTQ initiatives, stating, “I really don’t feel like it should be up to students to be
responsible for creating their own safe spaces. A school should be able to do that and I have not
seen that happen”. The implication here is that school organizations need to be responsible for
support and awareness raising, rather than expecting students to be ambassadors for change.
Addressing barriers to inclusivity. When the participants of this study were asked to
envision an ideal school for LGBTQ students, I found that most of them felt addressing barriers
to inclusivity was a priority. Curriculums, a lack of visibility outside the GSA, hesitancy to
openly express oneself as LGBTQ, were some of the concerns raised. The implication for the
school is that some of the barriers discussed by the four participants correlate with those raised in
studies on schools in the United States (see Kosciw et al., 2016). It would also suggest that
elements of Friend’s (1993) theory on systematic inclusion and exclusion do exist at the school,
where participants have referenced a lack of LGBTQ visibility or a lack of openly, positive role
models. While some participants cited pockets of visibility, the findings of this study would
suggest more could be done, beyond the existence of the Gay-Straight Alliance, especially in
terms of curriculum, school policy and positive representation.
LGBTQ educational programs. When talking with the four participants about what
new services could the school explore to better support LGBTQ students at the school, teaching
others to raise awareness on LGBTQ issues was a clear contender. Aside from educating all
students and faculty, parental education was one the participants felt most passionate about. It
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

90
was evident in talking with the four members of this Gay Straight Alliance, that the majority of
those students who attended were not openly out to their parents. This was evident in their
discussions on coming out, as well as the low participation rate in this study (since parental
approval was a school requirement). One implication for the school to consider is that in order to
better understand this subset of students, the school must be mindful that issues such as parental
consent, can very often set limitations on having such students come forward and share their
perceptions. The key word here is balance and I refer again to the American School Counselors
Association’s (2016) ethical standards regarding confidentiality, which states counselors must,
“recognize their primary ethical obligation for confidentiality is to the students but balance that
obligation with an understanding of parents’/guardians’ legal and inherent rights to be the
guiding voice in their children’s lives”. This standard has important implications for all
educators when working with LGBTQ students. It evident that the participants felt more could
be done to educate parents on LGBTQ related topics and studies have suggested this assists with
LGBTQ well-being. Ryan et al. (2010) state family acceptance is associated with positive young
adult mental and physical health for LGBTQ adolescents and that interventions that promote
parental and caregiver acceptance help reduce health disparities. The school often conducts
parent workshops. A consideration from the findings of this study is for the school to study and
conduct parent workshops on LGBTQ related topics.
Recommendations for Future Research
The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of the needs of a subset of
students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning. The study explored the
perceptions of those students who participate in a Gay-Straight Alliance at The International
School of East Asia (ISEA). One goal of this study was to better understand LGBTQ students
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

91
and their perceptions of the school. Even though only four participants came forward to take
part in this study, their perceptions have shed some insight into the lives of LGBTQ students at
ISEA. This study has referenced important data from the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education
Network’s(GLSEN), National School Climate Survey (NSCS), which gathers data on school
experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning (LGBTQ) students in the
United States. GLSEN’s Local School Climate Survey (LSCS) is a free online survey tool for
students, educators and other advocates. Based on the GLSEN’s National School Climate
Survey, this tool is intended for students in Grades 7-12 and asks about student perceptions of
their school climate, including biased language, harassment and availability of resources and
support (see Local School Climate Survey, n.d.).
It is a recommendation of this study, that the International School of East Asia consider
conducting its own local school climate survey to find out more about perceptions of students
and educators in regards to LGBTQ related issues. Results from a broader survey could better
inform teachers, administrators, and the entire school about student experience at the school.
This survey would help guide ISEA to further identify areas of change as it moves towards better
inclusivity for all.
Additional recommendations of this study focus on increasing or upgrading those school
based resources, which can better support lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning
(LGBTQ) students. First, research demonstrates that counselors play a vital role in the
development of LGBTQ students (Moe, Bacon, & Leggett, 2015). Counselors therefore require
skills to be competent in supporting such students, while ensuring visible, safe spaces. Second,
school based resources, which support LGBTQ students such as inclusive curriculum and the
presence of school clubs such as Gay-Straight Alliances (GSA), do have a positive outcome on
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

92
student well-being (Kosciw et al., 2016). In line with this research, it is a strong
recommendation that the school continue to support current GSAs, while ensuring there is
equitable on-campus visibility and funding that is comparable to all other clubs. Third, since
parent education was a notable finding in this study, it is recommended that the school review all
parent orientation materials and engagement, to reflect inclusivity for all students. Finally, in
order to ensure all educators at the school can deliver an inclusive curriculum and messaging to
all members of the school community, it is a recommendation there is a review of the school’s
mission and communication, to check on the consistent use of inclusive language. It is the
responsibility of administration to ensure an equitable school climate through increasing
structures, which can support students. Support provided by the school is more sustainable in the
long term, since both faculty and programs can provide continuity.
Conclusion
Schools present a unique opportunity to foster a sense of belonging for all students. In
order to foster belonging, schools must also focus on practices, which allow all students to
experience an inclusive environment. For LGBTQ students, schools around the world have a
long road ahead. Lee (2018) asks schools to pose these four questions:
1. Do you see me?
2. Do you hear me?
3. Will you treat me fairly?
4. Will you protect me?
Lee (2018) challenges schools to ask what kinds of practices can help all students answer these
questions in the affirmative and therefore enjoy a more inclusive school experience.
Unfortunately, for LGBTQ students in schools in the United States, while progress has been
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

93
made through greater access of supportive resources in schools, 57.6% of LGBTQ students felt
unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation, and 43.3% because of their gender
expression (Kosciw et al., 2016). It remains to be seen whether any further improvements have
been made since then with the 2017 National School Climate Survey report being released in the
fall of 2018.
This study examined the perceptions of four students who were members of a Gay-
Straight Alliance at The International School of East Asia (ISEA). It has looked at their
perceptions of other forms of support, the role the alliance has played in their social and
emotional well-being as well as what else could the school be doing to further improve the lives
of LGBTQ students. It is evident that the participants of this study see room for growth.
However, it is also evident that the Gay-Straight Alliance they attend creates a safe environment,
which acts as a buffer for its members. Considering the geographical location of the school, this
presents other unique challenges, which only one participant alluded to in this study. What is
clear is that the school must continue to support and encourage such alliances since they play a
vital role in the well-being of the students who attend them. ISEA is a resource rich school,
which is moving towards acknowledging the importance of diversity. Further research in
understanding marginalized groups would be an important step towards ensuring all members of
the school community feel a sense of belonging.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

94
References
Allen, K., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2016). What schools need to
know about fostering school belonging: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review,
doi:10.1007/s10648-016-9389-8
Alviar-Martin, T., & Ho, L. (2011). “So, where do they fit in?” teachers’ perspectives of multi-
cultural education and diversity in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1),
127-135. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.07.009
Attorney-General of Singapore. (n.d.). Singapore Statutes Online. Outrages on decency.
Retrieved from
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=be654e11-186a-47af- ba36-
a54317993ecc;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-
60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0%20ValidTime%3A198
70330000000%20TransactionTime%3A20160206000000;rec=0#pr377A-he-.
Bidell, M. (2005). The Sexual Orientation Counselor Competency Scale: Assessing attitudes,
skills, and knowledge of counselors working with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients.
Counselor Education & Supervision, 44(4), 267–279.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2005.tb01755.x
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An
introduction to theories and methods (5
th
ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

95
Cerezo, A., & Bergfeld, J. (2013). Meaningful LGBTQ inclusion in schools: The importance of
diversity representation and counterspaces. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 7(4),
355-371. doi:10.1080/15538605.2013.839341
Chong, T. (2011). Filling the moral void: The christian right in Singapore. Journal of
Contemporary Asia, 41(4), 566-583. doi:10.1080/00472336.2011.610614
Coulter, R. W. S., Birkett, M., Corliss, H. L., Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Mustanski, B., & Stall, R. D.
(2016). Associations between LGBTQ-affirmative school climate and adolescent drinking
behaviors. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 161, 340-347.
doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.02.022
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Third annual brown lecture in education research: The flat earth
and education: How america's commitment to equity will determine our future. Educational
Researcher, 36(6), 318-334. doi:10.3102/0013189X07308253
Definition of Terms| Centers for Educational Justice & Community Engagement. (2016).
Retrieved April 11, 2017, from http://ejce.berkeley.edu/geneq/resources/lgbtq-
resources/definition-terms
Detenber, B. H., Cenite, M., Zhou, S., Malik, S., & Neo, R. L. (2014). Rights versus morality:
Online debate about decriminalization of gay sex in Singapore. Journal of
Homosexuality, 61(9), 1313-1333. doi:10.1080/00918369.2014.926769
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

96
Fetner, T., & Elafros, A. (2015). The GSA difference: LGBTQ and ally experiences in high
schools with and without gay-straight alliances. Social Sciences, 4(3), 563-581.
doi:10.3390/socsci4030563
Fetner, T., Elafros, A., Bortolin, S., & Drechsler, C. (2012). Safe spaces: Gay-straight alliances
in high schools. Canadian Review of Sociology = Revue Canadienne De Sociologie, 49(2),
188.
Friend, R. A. (1993). Choices, not closets: Heterosexism and homophobia in schools. In L. Weis,
& M. Fine (Eds.), Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and gender in united states schools
(pp. 209-235) State University of New York Press Albany.
Freire, P., 1921-1997. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). New York:
Continuum.
Goldstein, S. B., & Davis, D. S. (2010). Heterosexual allies: A descriptive profile. Equity &
Excellence in Education, 43(4), 478-494.
Goodrich, K.M., Harper, A.J., Luke, M. & Singh, A.A. (2013) Best Practices for Professional
School Counselors Working with LGBTQ Youth, Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling,
7:4, 307-322, DOI: 10.1080/15538605.2013.839331
Grayson, D. A. (1987). Emerging equity issues related to homosexuality in education. Peabody
Journal of Education,64(4), 132-145. doi:10.1080/01619568709538574
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

97
Griffin, P., Lee, C., Waugh, J., & Beyer, C. (2004). Describing roles that gay-straight alliances
play in schools: From individual support to school change. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Issues
in Education, 1(3), 7-22. doi:10.1300/J367v01n03_03
Grossman, A. H., Haney, A. P., Edwards, P., Alessi, E. J., Ardon, M., & Howell, T. J. (2009).
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth talk about experiencing and coping with
school violence: A qualitative study. Journal of LGBT Youth, 6(1), 24-46.
doi:10.1080/19361650802379748
Heck, N. C., Flentje, A., & Cochran, B. N. (2011). Offsetting risks: High school gay-straight
alliances and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth. School Psychology
Quarterly, 26(2), 161.
Heck, N. C., Lindquist, L. M., Stewart, B. T., Brennan, C., & Cochran, B. N. (2013). To join or
not to join: Gay-straight student alliances and the high school experiences of lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender youths. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 25(1), 77-101.
doi:10.1080/10538720.2012.751764
Heck, N. C., Livingston, N. A., Flentje, A., Oost, K., Stewart, B. T., & Cochran, B. N. (2014).
Reducing risk for illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse: High school gay-straight
alliances and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Addictive Behaviors, 39(4), 824-
828. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.01.007
Kosciw, J. G., Greytak, E. A., Giga, N. M., Villenas, C., & Danischewski, D. J. (2016). The 2015
National School Climate Survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender,
and queer youth in our nation's schools. New York: GLSEN.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

98
Kosciw, J. G., Palmer, N. A., Kull, R. M., & Greytak, E. A. (2013). The effect of negative school
climate on academic outcomes for LGBT youth and the role of in-school supports. Journal
of School Violence, 12(1), 45-63. doi:10.1080/15388220.2012.732546
Kwon, P. (2013). Resilience in lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 17(4), 371-383. doi:10.1177/1088868313490248
Lee, C. (2002). The impact of belonging to a high school Gay/Straight alliance. The High School
Journal, 85(3), 13-26. doi:10.1353/hsj.2002.0005
Lee, R.E.R., (2018). Notes for a presentation on Inclusive Classroom Practices

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual Resource Center. (n.d.).
Retrieved December 16, 2017, from https://lgbtqia.ucdavis.edu/educated/pronouns.html
Lim, K. F. (2004). Where love dares (not) speak its name: The expression of homosexuality in
singapore. Urban Studies, 41(9), 1759-1788. doi:10.1080/0042098042000243147
Local School Climate Survey. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://localsurvey.glsen.org/
Macgillivray, I. K., 1967. (2007). Gay-straight alliances: A handbook for students, educators,
and parents. New York: Harrington Park Press.
Marx, R. A., & Kettrey, H. H. (2016). Gay-straight alliances are associated with lower levels of
school-based victimization of LGBTQ+ youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(7), 1269-1282. doi:10.1007/s10964-016-0501-7
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

99
Maxwell, J. A., 1941. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications
Mayberry, M. (2013). Gay-straight alliances: Youth empowerment and working toward reducing
stigma of LGBT youth. Humanity & Society, 37(1), 35-54. doi:10.1177/0160597612454358
Mayo, J. B. (2013). Critical pedagogy enacted in the Gay—Straight alliance: New possibilities
for a third space in teacher development. Educational Researcher, 42(5), 266-275.
doi:10.3102/0013189X13491977
McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What's good, what's not,
and how to tell the difference. Corwin Press.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (Fourth;CSZA; ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, E. J. (2007). " But I'm not gay": What straight teachers need to know about queer theory.
In W. Pinar, & N. Rodriguez (Eds.), Queering straight teachers: Discourse and identity in
education (pp. 15-29). New York: Peter Lang.
Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual
populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674.
Ministry of Education. (2016). MOE framework for sexuality education. Goals of sexuality
education. Retrieved April 14, 2017, from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/programmes/social-and-emotional-learning/sexuality-
education/moe-framework-for-sexuality-education
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

100
Ministry of Education, Singapore/Foreign Systems Schools. (n.d.). Retrieved April 11, 2017,
from https://www.moe.gov.sg/admissions/returning-singaporeans/singaporeans-returning-
home/foreign-systems-schools
Miceli, M. (2005). Standing out, standing together: The social and political impact of gay-
straight alliances. New York: Routledge.
Moe, J., Bacon, K., & Leggett, E. (2015). School Counselors as Allies: The Relationship
Between Sexual Orientation Competence and Open and Affirming Service for LGBTQ
Youth. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling,9(2), 74-91.
doi:10.1080/15538605.2015.1029206
Murakami-Ramalho, E. (2008; 2007). Domestic practices in foreign lands: Lessons on leadership
for diversity in American international schools. Journal of Studies in International
Education, 12(1), 76-95. doi:10.1177/1028315306291668
Obendorf, S. (2013). A few respectable steps behind the world? Gay and lesbian rights in
contemporary Singapore. In C. Lennox & M. Waites (Eds.), Human Rights, Sexual
Orientation and Gender Identity in the Commonwealth: Struggles for Decriminalisation
and Change, (pp. 231-259). London: Institute of Commonwealth Studies.
Oogachaga, . (2012). Impact of homophobia and transphobia on the LGBTQ individuals in
Singapore: Summary report. Retrieved from
http://oogachaga.com/files/SummaryReportMay2012c.pdf
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

101
Oogachaga, & Pink Dot SG. (2016). A joint report by Oogachaga and pink dot SG on human
rights issues specific to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in Singapore
for universal periodic review on Singapore in 2016. Retrieved from
http://oogachaga.com/files/UPRreport2015_PDOC_2.pdf
Oswin, N. (2014). Queer time in global city Singapore: Neoliberal futures and the ‘freedom to
love’. Sexualities, 17(4), 412-433. doi:10.1177/1363460714524765
Phillips, R. (2014). "and I am also gay": Illiberal pragmatics, neoliberal homonormativity and
LGBT activism in singapore. Anthropologica, 56(1), 45.
Pink Dot | Supporting the freedom to love. (n.d.). Retrieved April 14, 2017, from
https://pinkdot.sg/
Poteat, V. P., Heck, N. C., Yoshikawa, H., & Calzo, J. P. (2016). Greater engagement among
members of gay-straight alliances: Individual and structural contributors. American
Educational Research Journal, 53(6), 1732-1758. doi:10.3102/0002831216674804
Poteat, V. P., Sinclair, K. O., DiGiovanni, C. D., Koenig, B. W., & Russell, S. T. (2013). Gay–
Straight alliances are associated with student health: A multischool comparison of LGBTQ
and heterosexual youth. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(2), 319-330.
doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2012.00832.x
Poteat, V. P., Yoshikawa, H., Calzo, J. P., Gray, M. L., DiGiovanni, C. D., Lipkin, A., . . . Shaw,
M. P. (2015). Contextualizing Gay‐Straight alliances: Student, advisor, and structural factors
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

102
related to positive youth development among members. Child Development, 86(1), 176-193.
doi:10.1111/cdev.12289
Russell, S. T., Muraco, A., Subramaniam, A., & Laub, C. (2009). Youth empowerment and high
school gay-straight alliances. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(7), 891-903.
doi:10.1007/s10964-008-9382-8
Ryan, C., Russell, S. T., Huebner, D., Diaz, R., & Sanchez, J. (2010). Family acceptance in
adolescence and the health of LGBT young adults. Journal of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatric Nursing, 23(4), 205-213. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6171.2010.00246.x
Sadowski, M. (2016). More than a safe space: How schools can enable LGBTQ students to
thrive.(lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning). American Educator,
40(4), 4.
Seelman, K. L., Forge, N., Walls, N. E., & Bridges, N. (2015). School engagement among
LGBTQ high school students: The roles of safe adults and gay–straight alliance
characteristics. Children and Youth Services Review, 57, 19-29.
Steck, A. K., & Perry, D. R. (2016). Fostering safe and inclusive spaces for LGBTQ students:
Phenomenographic exploration of high school administrators' perceptions about GSAs.
Journal of LGBT Youth, 13(4), 352-377. doi:10.1080/19361653.2016.1185759
Sweat, J., Marzullo, M., Herdt, G., & Russell, S. T. (2006). Sexual inequality, youth
empowerment, and the GSA: A community study in california. () University of California
Press. doi:10.1525/california/9780520246140.003.0011
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

103
Szalacha, L. (2003). Safer sexual diversity climates: Lessons learned from an evaluation of
massachusetts safe schools program for gay and lesbian students. American Journal of
Education, 110(1), 58-88. doi:10.1086/377673
Tan, K.P., & Lee Jack Jin, G. (2007). Imagining the gay community in Singapore. Critical Asian
Studies, 39(2), 179-204. doi:10.1080/14672710701339311
Tierney, W. G. (1997). Academic outlaws: Queer theory and cultural studies in the academy.
Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Tierney, W. G., & Dilley, P. (1998). Constructing knowledge: Educational research and gay and
lesbian studies. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Queer theory in education (pp. 49–72). New York:
Routledge.
Toomey, R. B., & Russell, S. T. (2013). Gay-straight alliances, social justice involvement, and
school victimization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer youth: Implications for school
well-being and plans to vote. Youth & Society, 45(4), 500-522.
doi:10.1177/0044118X11422546
Toomey, R. B., & Russell, S. T. (2016). The role of sexual orientation in school-based
victimization: A meta-analysis. Youth & Society, 48(2), 176-201.
doi:10.1177/0044118X13483778
Toomey, R. B., Ryan, C., Diaz, R. M., & Russell, S. T. (2011). High school gay-straight
alliances (GSAs) and young adult well-being: An examination of GSA presence,
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

104
participation, and perceived effectiveness. Applied Developmental Science, 15(4), 175-185.
doi:10.1080/10888691.2011.607378
Twemlow, S. W., Fonagy, P., & Sacco, F. C. (2002). Feeling safe in school. Smith College
Studies in Social Work, 72(2), 303-326. doi:10.1080/00377310209517660
Valenti, M., & Campbell, R. (2009). Working with youth on LGBT issues: Why gay-straight
alliance advisors become involved. Journal of Community Psychology, 37(2), 228-248.
doi:10.1002/jcop.20290
Walls, N. E., Kane, S. B., & Wisneski, H. (2010). Gay—Straight alliances and school
experiences of sexual minority youth. Youth & Society, 41(3), 307-332.
doi:10.1177/0044118X09334957
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and
achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82-96.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82
Watson, L. B., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., & Graybill, E. C. (2010). Gay-straight alliance advisors:
Negotiating multiple ecological systems when advocating for LGBTQ youth. Journal of
LGBT Youth, 7(2), 100-128. doi:10.1080/19361651003799700
What is Solution-focused Therapy? (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2018, from
https://solutionfocused.net/what-is-solution-focused-therapy/
Worthen, M. G. F. (2014). The interactive impacts of high school gay-straight alliances (GSAs)
on college student attitudes toward LGBT individuals: An investigation of high school
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

105
characteristics. Journal of Homosexuality, 61(2), 217-250.
doi:10.1080/00918369.2013.839906
Yue, A. (2012). We’re the gay company, as gay as it gets. In Yue, A
& Zubillaga-Pow, J. (Eds.), Queer Singapore: Illiberal Citizenship and Mediated Cultures
(pp.197-212). Hong Kong University Press. Retrieved from http://www.eblib.com

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

106
Appendix A
Final Interview Protocol

Thank you for your time today. Before we begin, I would like to share the purpose of today’s
interview. I am conducting a study that aims to understand the perceptions of those students
who participate in the Gay Straight Alliance, in order to gain a better understanding of their
school experience in terms of support systems and structures. The study aims to gain an
insight into members who regularly participate in this school club.
I would like to clarify that I will not be sharing your identity. Names will be changed
through the use of pseudonyms. The name of the school will also be changed. This work is
part of my dissertation research to meet the requirements of the University of Southern
California EdD program, in which I am enrolled. Participation in this research is
voluntary. You may decline participation at any time throughout the study. Any information
I obtain from the interview will be used for research purposes only. You may also decline to
answer any questions during the interview process, should you not comfortable in providing
an answer. Should this occur, you may indicate this to me and I can move onto other
questions.
I am looking to spend between 45-60 minutes of your time today. Would you mind if I
recorded? The purpose of recording is so that I can pay attention to what you are saying
during the interview.
• If respondent agrees:
Thank you. I appreciate your agreeing to this.
• If respondent disagrees, is hesitant or seeks further clarification:
I respect your request. May I make a suggestion? May I record and if, any at stage of the
interview, you would like me to stop the recording, I am happy to do that.
GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

107
If respondent does not wish to be recorded during the interview:
I certainly respect your request. However, I would like to add that this interview might
take longer since I want to make sure I represent your experiences in your words and not
through my interpretation of your experiences. Thus, I will be taking careful notes.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

108
Appendix B
Final Interview Protocol – Interview Questions

Interview Questions

1. I would like to start this conversation by first asking you to tell me about yourself. Your grade
level, how long have you been at (name of school).

2. How long have you been a member of this club?

3. How did you come to learn of the GSA you currently attend?

4. How would you self-identify yourself in terms of sexual orientation and gender expression?

5. Thank you. Considering the answer you just shared, describe your current school experience in light
of your own identity.

The next set of questions I am going to ask you are going to focus on support services at (name of
school), specifically those services that support LGBTQ students.
6. What support services, if any, have you accessed at (name of school)?

7. If you have accessed any support services at (name of school), how did you find that experience?

8. Visible spaces (a place where one can comfortably display their gender identity or sexual
orientation) are said to be important for LGBTQ students. What do you think about this statement in
the context of (name of school)?
9. What barriers in regards to your identity, if any, do you perceive there to be at your school?

Thank you for sharing your perceptions. It is helping me to gain a deeper understanding of your
experiences. I would now like to specifically turn to the role of the GSA you currently attend.

10. How does the GSA support you as a student at (name of school)?
Prompts:
Social and emotional?
Academic?
If so, how?

11. It is has been said GSAs provide a visible, safe space for their members. What would you say in
regards to such a statement?

12. Ideally, GSAs are also venues to advocate for change. What are your views on this, considering the
GSA you currently attend?

13. Suppose you were asked by the school to propose a range of new services for LGBTQ students.
What might that proposal include and look like? Walk me through your ideal school environment for
an LGBTQ student.

14. I truly appreciate the input you have provided today. We are coming towards the end of our time
together today. Is there anything I should know that we haven’t talked about that would allow me to
understand your experience?

Thank respondent for their time.

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

109
Appendix C
Email text sent to participants upon receipt of signed consent

Dear (name of participant),

I am writing to you to request your participation in a research study that seeks to gain an understanding of
those students who may identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning as well as their
heterosexual allies. I have received the required informed consent form, indicating your interest in being a
participant in this study. Thank you.

This work is part of my dissertation research to meet the requirements of the University of Southern
California EdD program, in which I am enrolled. Participation in this research is voluntary. You may
decline participation at any time throughout the study. The research questions for this study are the
following:

1. What perceptions do students, who participate in the Gay-Straight Alliance club (GSA), have of the
support systems at (name of school)?

2. How do members of the GSA feel about the role the alliance plays in helping them succeed in their
academic and social-emotional well-being?

3. What other kinds of support services would members of the GSA like to see at (name of school)?

For the purpose of this research, I am requesting that you participate in a 1:1 interview. The interview will
last approximately 60 minutes and will occur on school grounds. Any information I obtain from the
interview will be used for research purposes only. You will remain anonymous; information gathered
may be used in my reporting. I will not use your name; instead, a pseudonym will be used.

I will need to arrange a date, venue and time. If you could let me know what dates and times work best for
you. I am happy to meet with you after school. The most private venue on campus is the (name of venue).
I am happy to meet you in the (location of meeting area) and then we can walk to this room.

Thank you again for expressing interest in participating in this study. As an appreciation of your time and
input, you will receive three vouchers, each to the value of $6.50.

Regards
(Name of researcher)

GAY-STRAIGHT ALLIANCES: A CASE STUDY

110

For additional resources - http://dissertationedd.usc.edu/
DSC contact information – rsoedsc@rossier.usc.edu or (213)740-8099

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Schools present unique opportunities to foster and improve belonging for all students. Meaningful inclusion requires visible and equal representation as well as safe environments (Cerezo and Bergfield, 2013

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A multiple case study: inclusion in international schools

PDF

Implementation of a wellness program, and the initiatives and strategies needed for employee engagement at a private international school

PDF

Factors related to the training, recruitment, and retention of quality bilingual teachers in dual language immersion programs in international schools

PDF

Middle school counselors’ perceptions of their role supporting LGBTQ+ youths’ belonging

PDF

Influence of academic youth-initiated mentoring on higher order cognitive development

PDF

Teacher leadership for personalized learning: An implementation study in an international school

PDF

Middle school GSAs: an analysis of strategies used in Los Angeles County

PDF

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

PDF

How service-learning educators help students learn: master teachers’ perspectives

PDF

Parenting during a pandemic: how stress and supports influence parental perceptions of child behaviors

PDF

Harnessing Genius Hour school-wide: examining teachers' perceptions of the implementation of personalized inquiry across an international middle school

PDF

Perceptions of preparedness among marital and family therapist trainees

PDF

A case study of an evidence-based approach to resource allocation at a school for at-risk and incarcerated students in Hawaii

PDF

A relational approach to discipline: a comparative case study of restorative justice implementation in US secondary schools

PDF

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

PDF

Impact of study abroad on student openness to diversity: an evaluation study

PDF

Principal leadership for diffusing innovation across an established, high-performing K-12 school system

PDF

The relationship of college climate and policy to transgender student belonging

PDF

Examining approaches to implementing Responsive Classroom within international schools

PDF

Elementary principals attitudes, perceptions, and their ability to support students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in inclusive settings

Asset Metadata

Creator Pearson, Robin Foster (author)

Core Title Gay straight alliances: A case study of member perceptions of support at an international school

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 07/20/2018

Defense Date 07/20/2018

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

Tag gay-straight alliances,international schools,LGBTQ,OAI-PMH Harvest,student perceptions,support

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Chung, Ruth (committee chair), Andres, Mary (committee member), Picus, Laurence (committee member)

Creator Email rfpearso@usc.edu,rpearson@sas.edu.sg

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-21885

Unique identifier UC11671463

Identifier etd-PearsonRob-6433.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-21885 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-PearsonRob-6433.pdf

Dmrecord 21885

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Pearson, Robin Foster

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 a...

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