A Comparison of Urban and Rural Middle and High School Teachers' Attitudes and Observations about LGBT Students

Background: This study conducts a comparative analysis of two data sets collected from a Teacher Attitudes and Observances of LGBT-specific Behaviors Survey distributed among middle and high school faculty in a rural and an urban school district in northwestern Pennsylvania. Research has demonstrated that LGBT youth experience high rates of harassment and bullying in school. This is linked to higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse, poor grades, truancy, drop-out rates, and suicide. Research also supports the identification of one faculty ally in their school can mitigate these risk factors for LGBT students. The researchers hypothesized that faculty with more positive attitudes toward LGBT students would observe less anti-LGBT behaviors than faculty with more negative attitudes. Additionally, we hypothesized that rural faculty would report more negative attitudes toward LGBT people than urban faculty, and that rural faculty would report more incidents of anti-LGBT bullying and harassment than urban faculty.

Methods: Faculty in both urban and rural middle and high schools in northwestern Pennsylvania (n = 139; 83 urban, 56 rural) were surveyed regarding their own attitudes toward LGBT individuals as well as recent anti-LGBT incidents they had observed in the school environment. The survey instrument included a 11-item LGBT Attitudes Scale (α = .96) and a 16-item LGBT-Experiences Questionnaire (LGBT-EQ) (α = .79). Surveys were distributed during an in-service training regarding working with LGBT students for faculty.  

Results: As hypothesized, rural faculty reported significantly more negative attitudes toward LGBT people than their urban counterparts (p < .005). However, there were no significant differences in rural vs. urban faculty responses across all items of the LGBT-EQ save one. More urban faculty reported having heard a peer calling an LGBT student a name than rural faculty (p < .05). Across both rural and urban schools, faculty reported regular incidences of anti-LGBT behavior. When asked how often they had observed a range of LGBT-specific behaviors within the previous month, 72% of faculty reported hearing a student use LGBT-specific language in a negative manner, and more than half reported name-calling by peers. Approximately one quarter reported peers “outing” an LGBT student, anti-LGBT graffiti on school grounds, and peer exclusion of an LGBT student. Nearly 10% reported damage to an LGBT student’s property and physical harm to an LGBT student.  

Conclusions and Implications: A primary conclusion of this study is that in both urban and rural schools, faculty observe that LGBT students regularly experience bullying and harassment. As many episodes of bullying occur outside the presence of faculty, it is fair to assume that the actual rates of these anti-LGBT behaviors are substantially higher. This study also supports the hypothesis that faculty who teach in rural areas have poorer attitudes toward LGBT people than faculty teaching in urban areas. Discussion is offered regarding the need for further research about understanding the relationship between faculty attitudes about LGBT people, their observations of anti-LGBT behaviors, and their actions following these observations, so as to ensure that LGBT students have a safe learning environment.