Transcript Psychology at the Crossroads: Gay and Bi Men’s Accounts of

Psychology at the Crossroads:
Gay and Bi Men’s Accounts of
Learning and Teaching in U.K.
Psychology Departments
Ian Hodges & Carol Pearson
Dec 2006
Background 1:
We know that gay men face all manner of prejudice in their day-to-day lives, not
only physical and verbal assault (e.g. Rhoads, 1995; Slater, 1993; Waldo et al.,
1998) but also the less visible aspects of homophobia and oppression which
result from the all pervasive nature of heterosexism (both ‘psychological' and
cultural) in Western culture.
However very little is known about the learning and teaching experience of gay
men (and other sexual minorities) in UK universities. It has been argued that
lesbian and gay issues is a neglected area in education, this is partly due to
government policy and partly because those who work as teachers want to avoid
the issue - education, it is suggested, is viewed as being in the public domain
whereas sexuality is part of the private domain this duality makes it difficult to
address homosexuality in an educational setting (Epstein, 1994).
Background 2:
Eyre (1993) criticised compulsory heterosexism in the university classroom
finding that prospective teachers often viewed anti-heterosexist pedadogy as
equivalent to promoting homosexuality and that this standpoint was morally
wrong.
However the issue is not just one of neglect and avoidance, Skelton (1999)
argued that texts such as the Dearing Report and the Governments Green
Paper, the learning age (DfES, 1998) which comment on Higher Education and
issues of inclusivity merely focus on ‘inclusive access’ but neglect ‘inclusive
experience’ which would require both structural and cultural changes for
example Waldo (1998) suggested that the campus climate is often hostile
towards LGB undergraduates and graduates and that this hostile context
adversely effects their educational experience.
Background 3:
Insert new research here from Ianfound that gay students
experience of studying psychology Institutionalised
homophobia has a detrimental impact on students’
experience in terms of the exclusion from the curriculum,
the teaching and learning environment and the social
and personal environment
Hodges & Pearson (2003, 2005):found that gay students experienced
institutional homophobia
There was an expectation on the part of the participants to gain a deeper understanding of
themselves but not in terms of their sexuality
the curriculum which was described as sometimes homophobic and heterocentric which led to
feelings of exclusion
Participants reported feelings of ‘inhibition’ within the teaching and learning environment in terms
of their relationships with both staff and students
Particiapnts reported feelings of exclusion from both the social & personal university environment
Objectives:
This study explores the experiences of gay men who have studied or who are
studying psychology at university/Higher Education level across England,
Scotland and Wales. There is a particular focus on psychology’s treatment of
sexuality within its subject matter and the experience of being gay in a university
psychology department. This project builds on the authors previous research
and has been funded by the Higher Education Academy.
Through an in-depth qualitative analysis we focus upon four key areas;
1.
2.
3.
4.
Student expectations of psychology
The learning and teaching environment
Curriculum content
The social and personal environment
Method 1:
Given the complexity of the accounts sought for this study principles from the
methodological approach of Glaser & Strauss (1967) were adopted as it is
particularly suited to the study of local meanings and interactions related to the
social context in which they occur. Using grounded theory methods, the aim of
this study is to generate ‘theory’ which fits the data well (through an iterative
process of comparison).
In this way we aim to map the various relationships between students and
psychology (in its operation as an academic discipline and as it is related to
institutional forms e.g university psychology departments).
Method 2:
Participants: ?? participants were recruited for this study. Participants’ ages
range from ?? - ??. Throughout the study the confidentiality of the participants
was been guaranteed and maintained. It was agreed that the universities, a
total of ??, at which participants are studying will not be identified.
Procedure: Data was collected using semi-structured one-to-one informal
interviews. These were conducted with a sample of current and ex-students (up
to three years after graduation) who had taken psychology as (at least) the
major element of their undergraduate degree programme. The interview protocol
was based upon literature searches, piloting and the authors previous research
findings.
Results 1: Four key areas were explored and findings indicate that:
Firstly, student expectations of reading psychology at university level reflected
the findings of previous research participants expressed an expectation of a
deeper understanding of themselves & others. However issues concerning
sexuality were not given a primary status
‘….. and I think I might have well latched onto this kind of idea of finding out what makes
people tick’ ---------------‘I was not, I was quite experienced at that stage, … I mean I’m
openly gay … so, these questions were not really an issue for me and they did not really
trigger a decision to study psychology’
This lack of expectation with regard to the provision of content concerning
sexual identity potentially reflects not only students’ experience of pre-HE syllabi
but also the stories that psychology tells about itself (which are articulated with
culturally embedded understandings) as scientific/disinterested. That is, if sexual
minority issues are conceptualised as fundamentally political, they will not count
as an element of an apolitical discipline.
Results 2:
Secondly, participants reported a feeling of exclusion as well as a lack of
identification and appropriateness with respect to curriculum content which was
described by our interviewees as sometimes being homophobic and
heterocentric in nature.
‘I don’t think that I’ve had any lectures directly on gay issues or sexuality issues, It has
never really come up, so in that respect it hasn’t really included anything yet’
There was very strong support for greater inclusion of LGBT material in the
syllabus to reflect the lived experience of gay men. Many students mentioned
that they had to ‘translate’ course material in order to counter the
heteronormative assumptions of much psychological research. Moreover,
representation of a range of experiences/ identities was identified as necessary
across a broad range of topics rather than limited to areas with a specific link to
sexual identity e.g. research on attraction/relationships.
Results 3:
Thirdly, participants discussed that they had developed strategies by which they
dealt with their inhibitions with respect to their relationships with both staff and
students within the teaching and learning environment.
‘I think as a gay man operating in a straight world, you don’t have those expectations. I
think you get to become more self driven, perhaps more self-reliant, so the expectation
really wasn’t there in the first place’
These strategies can be conceptualised as ways of coping within a
heterosexually oriented institutional context. Psychology departments do not
appear to be any less heteronormative than UK culture/society in general, thus
gay students must carefully navigate their relationships with students and staff
while at the same time finding ways to cope with the heteronormative value
systems and structures of university psychology departments.
Results 4:
Fourthly, there was an indication that difficulties with the personal and social
milieu resulted in a clear separation between university and domestic
environments.
‘I’ve not emphasis in your gay life in the university, because it’s the wrong place, you
know… Sorry but it’s the wrong place …university is a place to achieve the knowledge and
to improve knowledge, not to show your sexual behaviour or your sexual orientation in
life’
Again, here we see a key means of coping with the dominant (heteronormative)
value system as reflected in both departmental and university culture as a
whole. Students’ personal lives were routinely self-censored to enable a sense
of fitting-in with the prevailing social climate. Many participants reported a highly
conditional form of acceptance (i.e. more like tolerance) from other students.
Conclusions:
Analysis indicates that institutionalised homophobia has a detrimental
impact on students’ experience due to exclusionary practices evident in
areas such as:
 Curriculum content
 The teaching and learning environment
 The social and personal environment
Recommendations:
 Psychology needs to fully recognise homosexuality as a normal form of
sexual expression
 Implement procedures and policies that will enable more inclusive
teaching and learning practices in psychology
 Implementation of staff training programmes
References:
Glazer, B & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded theory. Chicago University Press.
Hill, R. et al. (2002) In the Shadow of the Arch: Safety and Acceptance of LGBTQ Students at the University
of Georgia. UGA Campus Climate Research Group.
Rhoads, R. (1995). Learning from the Coming-Out Experiences of College Males. Journal of College
Student Development. Vol. 36, (1): 67-74
Slater, B. (1993). Violence Against Lesbian and Gay Male College Students. Journal of College Student
Psychotherapy. Vol 8, (1-2): 177-202.
Waldo, C., Hesson-McInnis, M., & D’Augelli, A. (1998). Antecedents and Consequences of Victimisation of
Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Young People: A Structural Model Comparing Rural University and Urban
Samples. American Journal of Community Psychology. Vol 26, (2): 307-334.
Waldo, C. R. (1998). Out on Campus: Sexual Orientation and academic climate in a University context.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 745-774.
Epstein, D. (1994). Challenging lesbian and gay inequality in education. Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Skelton, A. (1999). An inclusive Higher Education? Gay and Bisexual male teachers and the cultural
politics of sexuality. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 3, 239-255.
Eyre, L. (1993). Compulsory heterosexism in the university classroom. Canadian Jouranl of Education, 18,
273-284
Hodges, I. and Pearson, C. (2003). Silent Minority: Gay men’s experience of University Psychology
courses in the UK. Poster presented at BPS Annual Conference, March 2003.
Hodges, I. & Pearson, C. (2005) Out From The Margins: Exploring Gay Men's Accounts of Learning and
Teaching in U.K. Psychology Departments. Paper presented at the BPS Quinquennial Conference,
Manchester, UK. 30 March-1April.