The TEFA Curriculum Mapping Research Project consists of podcast interviews with UBC Faculty of Education scholars discussing the implementation of SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) education and curriculum, both in public schooling and higher education. This website is intended as a resource for those studying related topics and for teachers and teacher candidates seeking useful ideas and support for the integration of SOGI related topics, concepts, readings and materials in their curriculum and classroom instruction. These interviews took place between 2016-2018 and were conducted by Dr. Lori MacIntosh, Dr. Kedrick James and TEFA Graduate Research Assistant, Kate Paterson. For further information on the Teacher Education for All! project, please visit this website.
As the Inaugural project for the Teacher Education for All (TEFA) initiative, Dr. Lori MacIntosh and Dr. Kedrick James developed a plan to map the existing teacher education curriculum with a focus on sexual orientation and gender identity. They undertook a two-stage approach to mapping: 1) a survey of existing syllabi, and 2) interviews with Faculty of Education instructors. The goal of the curriculum mapping project was to identify the scope of SOGI-related curriculum currently included in Faculty of Education Bachelor of Education course syllabi. The researchers approached the mapping with the assumption that the syllabi would indicate the SOGI content currently being taught, along with assignments, classroom activities and pedagogical content that lends or could lend itself to the inclusion of SOGI knowledge. It was also a possibility that the syllabi would allow them to identify best practices and curricular gaps.The first phase was a general survey of Bachelor of Education curriculum. A request for available course outlines (two most recent years) was sent to all departments that engage in the Teacher Education Program. While most departments provided the requested materials, there was some reticence and eventual refusal by one department.
The researchers analysed the course outlines, taking note of where they observed any instances of overt references to SOGI as well as implied content. Curriculum were then mapped according to types of SOGI materials incorporated, including but not exclusive of course descriptions, topics & themes, activities, assignments, common course texts, media, and/or scholarly readings. Further granularity in the analysis of data was pursued through differentiating instances relating to categories of gender, gender identity, sexuality, social justice, diversity, and intersectionalities.
It soon became clear that some SOGI content existed and was explicitly identifiable in a number of course outlines. However, the researchers also came to understand that a large portion of content was likely taught during course instruction and not necessarily explicitly detailed in the course outline. For example, discussions of homophobia, gender and bullying were treated as knowledge relating to SOGI, but readings were not always assigned nor were there direct references in the course objectives or activities.
At this point, the TEFA team decided that to mobilize knowledge from within the Faculty, it would be prudent to follow up this initial survey with short interviews with instructors. Potential interviewees were identified and included those who had current and previous experience teaching core BEd courses. All interviewees were selected to ensure departmental representation as well as a diversity of disciplinary backgrounds and equitable representation of gender.
Ten key faculty were interviewed from the four departments, in addition to two administrative staff. Interviewees were asked to explore the current integration of SOGI of SOGI related units, readings, course instruction, etc. For consistency, all interviews were structured around the following four questions:
1) What is the interviewee’s field of expertise, and how is SOGI envisioned within that discipline?
2) How is SOGI worked into the syllabi they have created?
3) What instructional experiences and advice can be offered regarding teaching SOGI related curriculum within the context of the BEd program?
4) What are the difficulties or points of resistance in implementing SOGI into BEd curriculum?
The interviews offered important insights highlighting both existing curricular gaps and an increasing awareness of, and a demand for, the integration of SOGI content. In the initial findings, two insights were consistently significant to a majority of the instructors. First, there is a need to expand conversations about curricular and pedagogical inclusions of SOGI material. Secondly, a number of faculty felt the absence of curricular inclusion often spoke to a lack of comfort regarding sexual and gender identity-related content but not a lack of desire to teach such content.
Interviewees stated that the pedagogical and curricular inclusions are often provisional and dependent upon individual instructor knowledge, areas of specialization and, again, comfort level. Other findings included a growing awareness of the importance of teaching about SOGI issues and concern that emergent terminology is often difficult and complex for instructors and students. There was a general agreement that instructors are receptive to the ideas of integrating explicit SOGI elements into curriculum and desired some direction regarding where SOGI content “fits” in the course offerings. Some faculty offered examples of readings that work well in their courses and noted that types and diversity of SOGI course content that was possible. Lastly, they reported that SOGI curricular inclusion was dependent on the subject matter being taught and the instructor’s consideration of its relevance related to that subject matter.
Faculty reported encountering points of resistance from students and made suggestions for overcoming such resistance in a positive way. Even with concerns about resistance, instructors feel positive about the future inclusion of SOGI, in part because of TEFA initiatives. They stated that they enjoyed and felt positively about TEFA professional development opportunities and were looking forward to continuing and advanced SOGI awareness.
While the curricular mapping and interviews focused on the content of the existing teacher education curriculum, there is also a clear overlap of SOGI education in relation to the broader issues of social justice that are so central to the UBC Teacher Education Program as a whole. In the second year of the TEFA project Drs. James and MacIntosh are utilizing these initial findings to inform ongoing research, which they plan to submit for publication. Dr. MacIntosh has already presented this work to a faculty-wide forum and two alumni events. It is the hope of everyone involved in the project that the resources and artefacts generated by TEFA initiatives will continue to advance SOGI knowledge in education as we continue to build on the strengths that exist in the Faculty.