Supporting Queer and Trans* College Students Amidst Political Turmoil

The crises that continue to rock our society seem never ending, especially for queer and trans* folks who continue to deal with the politicization of their bodies and threats to change the legality of gay marriage. These sociopolitical debates pose challenges for people of all ages but especially for students at colleges and universities. Partaking in an institution that is heavily heterosexist and white-knuckling the gender-binary, queer and trans* students are already struggling to fit within higher education. Amidst the escalating rhetoric surrounding trans* athletes in college sports and rollbacks of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts, some queer and trans* students may feel their best route is to depart from these institutions. It is up to colleges and universities to continue to fight for and help develop all students regardless of their identity. A growing body of research offers actionable insights into how colleges and universities can better support queer and trans* students in continuing their education. Higher education institutions can and should be leveraging this research to make the appropriate changes and fight for their students’ right to an education. 

This article uses a variety of acronyms and words used to describe those who hold lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and other sexual and gender identities. I use the words queer and trans* to create a clear distinction between sexual identity and gender identity. I also use these words to encompass the wide array of identities and expressions people hold as well as how those identities change, grow, and expand for each individual throughout their life. When other acronyms appear, they reflect the language used by the original authors in the sources being cited.

Throughout the history of higher education, queer and trans* students have been ostracized, excluded and removed from colleges and universities (Renn, 2010). This was due to the fact that up until the 1970s, queer and trans* students were viewed and classified by the DSM as mentally ill (Renn, 2010). Those who were outed were routinely expelled from colleges and universities altogether (Renn, 2010). While the DSM classification has changed, many campuses and the structures within them hold onto heterosexist and gendered cultures and norms. Gendered housing, sports and bathrooms are some major structures on higher education institutions that rely on the gender binary to continue to operate. While some colleges and universities have taken steps to ensure the inclusion of queer and trans* students through resource centers and student groups, there are many other ways institutions can continue to show their support to queer and trans* students. Below, I detail changes or shifts higher education institutions can take to promote queer and trans* students’ sense of belonging, especially amid the current political climate.

 

Ways Higher Education Institutions Can Support Queer and Trans* Students

Policy and Practice

College administrators and stakeholders largely engage with queer and trans* students through policy and practice. Non-discrimination policies are an effective way to showcase support for LGBTQ+ students as long as it is backed up with an effective practice of the policy (Pitcher et al., 2018). Students take into account and feel the value they bring to campus when institutional policies uplift their identities, regardless of whether they have to use the policy on their behalf. While students feel supported when institutions have a policy in place, having an environment and practice that upholds the policy is also important for LGBTQ+ students on campus (Pitcher et al., 2018). 

Policy discourse is another area for improvement on higher education campuses. The rhetoric used within policies on campus can shape how students are viewed and described. A majority of higher education policies use rhetoric that describe queer and trans* individuals as an object of anger or violence and the institutional policy is there to “save” them from this (Dirks, 2016). While this may seem admirable, it takes away the agency and resourcefulness that queer and trans* students have and seek. Recommendations to combat this would be to leverage queer and trans* voices on policy reform or the development of new policies to account for the lived experiences of these people on higher education campuses. When these voices are heard and used, policy rhetoric can shift from LGBT students being portrayed as victims to these students becoming agents for change on campus (Dirks, 2016).

 

Engagement with Students

Engagement in some form with all students on campus is crucial for student development, but even more so for queer and trans* individuals. Faculty, staff, and administrators must make a continuous effort to respect and remember students’ names and pronouns. There is much literature surrounding queer and trans* student success and belonging and how it relates to instructional and personal engagement with this population (Jaekel, 2021). Sense of belonging on a college campus is paramount for all students but it is especially critical for queer and trans* students and their retention on campus (Lange et al., 2019). 

There are a multitude of ways faculty, staff, and administrators can foster a sense of belonging for these students. One easy way to do this is by continuously affirming students’ queer and trans* identities. Using correct pronouns and correct names as well as maintaining anti-heterosexist language in class and interpersonal conversations are simple ways to foster a sense of belonging and support queer and trans* student populations. When institutional support fails students, it is up to the faculty, staff, and other employees to ensure they are supporting queer and trans* students through the use of correct names, pronouns, and active thought about this population and their place on campus. 

 

Academic Environments

Academic environments such as the classroom setting or other spaces on campus have the ability to isolate, target, or render LGBTQ students ultimately invisible (Lange et al., 2019). These spaces—where queer and trans* students are required to be (i.e. through class lectures and discussions)—can cause students great discomfort if their identities are not taken into consideration or if they are called upon to educate the larger class on queer and trans* issues (Lange et al., 2019). Classroom environments can be intentionally designed to incorporate queer and trans* voices across the curriculum, while taking into account queer and trans* thought processes and identities. Faculty, the curricula they design, and the discussions that take place in the classroom have a greater impact on queer and trans* students now than ever before (Lange et al., 2019). When classroom spaces are assembled with LGBTQ identities in mind, these students have been seen to thrive (Lange et al., 2019). When students see themselves reflected within the material and have the opportunity to reflect upon how they experience the world, they feel a sense of support and advocacy on their behalf (Jaekel, 2021). Faculty have the responsibility to make themselves and their classrooms a place where these students feel comfortable and a place where they can prosper. 

 

Resource Centers and Organizations

Queer and trans* resource centers and student organizations are a great place for building community and creating a sense of belonging for these students. Having a physical space to which students can turn as their “first stop” symbolizes structural LGBTQ+ support and inclusion (Pitcher et al., 2018). If students at an institution do not have access to a specific space or place on campus, LGBTQ+ student organizations are another resource that can positively influence the retention of these students (Pitcher et al., 2018). Members of the university being knowledgeable about and uplifting these resources on campus can introduce students to the queer and trans* community and potentially change the trajectory of students’ higher education career. 

Another area to consider improving within resource centers and organizations is the level of interaction between identity-driven organizations. Students’ intersecting identities play a huge role on college campuses and these centers and organizations are a place for their identities to come together (Renn, 2010). Faculty advisors of student organizations and professional staff in the queer and trans* resource centers can advocate for these organizations to come together through meetings and events, in turn, providing opportunities for additional communities to emerge. 

 

Conclusion

While some of these changes may seem small to institutions and the people who work within them, they can make a notable difference for a student who may be debating whether or not to remain on campus because they feel like they don’t belong. These changes, especially within the current political climate, can affect the overall campus culture and show how institutions can advocate for all of their students. It is up to higher education institutions to continue to combat the various anti-trans bills and the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts being forced upon them. Queer and trans students have survived—and in some cases thrived—within higher education by building campus community, receiving support from faculty and staff, and drawing on their own resilience. We cannot continue to rely on queer and trans* students’ resilience alone and must take action so that queer and trans* students feel they belong.

 

References

Dirks, D. A. (2016). Transgender people at four Big Ten campuses: A policy discourse analysis. The Review of Higher Education, 39(3), 371–393. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2016.0020

Jaekel, K. S. (2021). Supporting LGBTQ students through precarity: Policies and practices for inclusion. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2021(196), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20481

Lange, A. C., Duran, A., & Jackson, R. (2019). The state of LGBT and queer research in higher education revisited: Current academic houses and future possibilities. Journal of College Student Development, 60(5), 511–526. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2019.0047

Pitcher, E. N., Camacho, T. P., Renn, K. A., & Woodford, M. R. (2018). Affirming policies, programs, and supportive services: Using an organizational perspective to understand LGBTQ+ college student success. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 11(2), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000048

Renn, K. A. (2010). LGBT and queer research in higher education. Educational Researcher, 39(2), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x10362579