1. RESPECT FOR ALL Year one evaluation of the New York City Department of Education Respect for All Training Program. Shelley Chappell, Presenter

2. This 2010 report is from: The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) www.glsen.org

3. ... facilitates the development of inclusive, bias-free schools and communities by providing media resources, support and training to youth, educators and service providers. http://groundspark.org/ Through its Respect For All Project, GroundSpark (a partner with GLSEN):

4. Consider... Every individual matters. Every individual has a role to play. Every individual makes a difference. - Jane Goodall

5. Does intensive training for educators to address bias-based bullying and harassment create a a safer school environment for all, including LGBTQ students? Essential question

6. Background: The New York City Department of Education (NYC DOE) piloted a Respect for All training program for secondary educators in the summer of 2007. The program was fully implemented for school years 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-10.

7. Subject headings prior to 1972 After 1972 The American Library Association (ALA)

8. In intervening years, the ALA has been at the forefront of addressing issues related to services for LGBTQ patrons.

9. This case study looks at information obtained from surveying educators who participated in the Respect for All training. Surveys were given three separate times.

10. Why did the NYC DOE implement this program?  To combat bullying and victimization of LGBTQ students  In recognition of the fact that LGBTQ students are at higher risk

11. The NYC DOE implemented Respect for All to create safer schools for all students, including LGBTQ students.

12. The five main goals of the NYC DOE in implementing Respect for All:  Inclusion  Intervention  Support for students  Support for other staff members  To help end detrimental language and practices

13. Implementation of Respect for All  Principals invited  69 trainings during school year 2007-2008.  248 schools participated; 1054 educators took part.  Remaining schools invited to participate in subsequent years

14. What did the training look like?  Two days  Activities, lectures, posters, procedures

15. Evaluation of the program  Questionnaires administered three times  813 participants  Majority of participants were teachers

16. Demographics of the sample 46.2 % teachers 31.7% counselors, school social workers 3.7% administrators 8.4% other position 10% unknown 67.7% female / 23.1% male / 0.1% other gender identity / 9.3% unknown

17. Additionally: Identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual: 7.0% yes 81.2% no 11.8% unknown Previous training: 28.7% yes 60.5% no 2.6% not sure 8.2% unknown

18. Training Focus To have a direct impact on participants’ awareness, beliefs, and to thus result in higher levels of intervention. Overarching goal: a more supportive environment for all.

19. Awareness, knowledge, & beliefs related to actions: Intervention in anti-LGBTQ behaviors Efforts to create safer schools Have ever talked one-on-one about LGBTQ issues Number of students talked with one-on-one Frequency of speaking with colleagues Personal use of anti-LGBTQ language

20. Participant opinions (qualitative data) post-training (times 2 and 3) 92.2% indicated that training had caused them to change. The most common change was willingness to intervene. Specifics (of those who stated their actions had changed, what they have done differently): Intervened due to language50% Became more self-aware49.1% Talked to other staff about what had learned49.1% Took action to create safer environment25% Offered resources25% Stopped using harmful language and practices23.7%

21. “Before the training I was unsure how to respond to comments such as ‘that’s so gay.’ Since I’ve begun addressing them, I’ve found that students are much more aware of what they’re saying and it’s created a more tolerant classroom. Students have even told me that they have stopped using the phrase outside of class because they realized how often they were using it.” High School English Teacher

22. Changes over time (objective findings – quantitative data) Survey responses over time indicate some positive changes: Appropriate terms Access to resources Communication Activities to support safer schools Increased awareness of own harmful practices Belief in importance of intervention Frequency of intervention

23. However, quantitative data did not support all positive findings from qualitative data. Increased self-confidence and comfort level Increased awareness of bias Conclusion: Training should include skill-building – the “how to”.

24. Finally... Many participants indicated that they could not make significant changes alone. The involvement of additional staff, and in particular of administrators, was recommended.

25. “The culture used to offer this deal to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people: You’re ours to torture until you’re eighteen.” From the book, It Gets Better: Coming Out, Overcoming Bullying, and Creating a Life Worth Living, edited by Dan Savage and Dan Miller, Dutton, 2011.