Promoting school success for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, and questioning students: primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and intervention strategies

Fisher, E, Komosa-Hawkins, K, Saldana, E, Thomas, G, & Hsiao, C. (2008). Promoting school success for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, and questioning students: primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and intervention strategies. The California School Psychologist, 13, 79-91.

            I will be researching the extent of the effort to prevent an anti-gay bias in teachers at all levels of education through both teacher workshops and programs within individual schools.  I will also attempt to reveal the positive and negative effects of implementing these programs within schools at various levels of education (elementary, middle, and high school).

            This article focused on the idea that the school environment is key to developing a safe and neutral ground for the “sexual minority” student to develop and grow within in order to become comfortable with their own identity.  According to the text, in 2005 less than 40% of school districts within the United States offered any sort of educational program regarding sexuality in any level of the education system.  The authors suggested the use of a system of programs tailored toward the general needs of the students – a “Primary Prevention” program would reach all students at all levels and promote an environment of respect and safety; a “Secondary Prevention” program would target select students who are deemed to be at-risk due to the possibility of developing mental health issues such as lack of self-esteem, behavioral problems, and depression; a “Tertiary Prevention” program would target those already experiencing more serious emotional problems such as being at-risk for drop-out, victims of bullying and general physical violence, and those suffering from depression and often attempted suicide.  Each is adjusted to properly target students at various levels of maturity as well as prevents a generalized view of the subject of LGBT bullying, considering a student already “out” may take verbal bullying regarding their sexuality in an entirely different way than a student who is in the first stages of questioning their sexual orientation.

            Although the article did not observe specifically educator-focused programs, it does support the idea that if educators continue to lack in knowledge regarding LGBT (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered) students, other students will remain uneducated on the topic as well and therefore allow for bigotry and bullying to ensue.  By educating teachers about the LGBT community and general process a young individual goes through when “coming-out” while at a young school age, it can open doors to create programs such as those listed above that focus on creating a safe environment for LGBT students to thrive in and to prevent the high rate of drop outs that often comes with a generalized perspective of gay students.