Change In School Adoption and Implementation of Transgender and Nonbinary Youth-Protective Education Policies and Procedures over Time

Background and Purpose: Discrimination and violence in high school place gender and sexual minority youth (GSMY) at increased risk of academic challenges and health burden compared to their cisgender and heterosexual peers. While some states like California increasingly adopted GSMY-protective policies since 2010, local implementation of these protections have been gradual and inconsistent. With a sample of 6 schools enrolled in an intervention research study, this study investigated the conditions that precipitate change in school GSMY-protective policies, facilities, and procedures between the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 academic year.

Methods: Six schools participating in a larger randomized controlled trial of the Proud & Empowered (a 10-week GSMY psychosocial intervention in Fall semesters) and Make Space (a 5-week civic development & school climate intervention in Spring) interventions were eligible to participate in this two-year multiple comparison case study. The sample included 6 schools across 2 districts: the Aster District with Dandelion (Intervention), Thistle (Intervention), and Dahlia (Control) High Schools and the Amaryllis District with Daffodil (Control), Chive (Control), and Agapanthus (Intervention) High Schools. In the Fall 2022 & 2023 semesters, researchers collected school and district policy documents and conducted campus observations with notes and photography. in the Spring 2022 and 2023 semesters, researchers followed up with member checks and, in intervention schools, focus group discussions with Make Space youth participants. Co-coders extracted data into a structured data matrix for Framework analysis, allowing line-by-line comparison of school policies, facilities, and procedures in 2022-2023 versus 2023-2024.

Results: All schools in the sample evidenced minimal to substantial improvements over two years. The most substantial and numerous school improvements occurred in Agapanthus High School, where student advocacy as part of the Make Space intervention coincided with supportive staff efforts and districtwide policy and financial commitments to GSMY inclusion. Changes at Agapanthus High School included provision of a new gender-neutral restroom centrally located alongside sex-segregated restrooms; visible displays of GSMY support such as rainbow flags, safe space stickers, and posters in offices and classrooms; a newly hired parent liaison who prioritized GSMY inclusion; and a new name change and student privacy policy. School-level changes were accompanied by Amaryllis District efforts independent of the Make Space intervention, including establishment of District Pride Advisory Committee and release of funding to support GSMY inclusion in Amaryllis District. Despite being in the same district, other Amaryllis District Schools (Daffodil and Chive, both control schools) did not evidence the same degree of change. Regardless of intervention, Aster District Schools evidenced less change over time than Agapanthus High School.

Conclusions and Implications: Study findings indicate that multilevel school interventions to school improvement that include student leadership may facilitate increased protections for GSMY. Results reflect the Stream Model of policy process, which contends that aligned pressure by multiple actors (advocates, educators, administrators, interventionists) can open “windows of opportunity” that facilitate policy adoption and implementation. Findings point to the importance of multilevel approaches that engage and align the activities of students, schools, districts, and community advocates to facilitate adoption and implementation of GSMY-protective policies and facilities.