Diversity in Australian society has meant that Australian schools must meet the challenge of

teaching students with different backgrounds (Connell et al., 2010). This requires teachers to have
an understanding of the different levels of equity and access minority groups face. Teachers must
also understand that individual students may belong to several minority groups, and be mindful of
the challenges these students face (Connell et al., 2010). Students who belong to a minority group
tend to suffer as a result of inequity and access (or lack, thereof). Thus, it is imperative for teachers
to be reflexive about their habitus and pedagogy in relation to equity and access of their students
(Smyth, 2014). This inequality affects students' educational and life chances (Hattie, 2003). This
essay will examine the effects of teacher habitus and pedagogy on the challenges faced by Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) students using feminism, functionalism, post-
structuralism, Bourdieu's theories of symbolic violence and critical theory.

Student diversity results in different levels of access and life chances, and this can be understood
via sociological frameworks. However, in order to speak about the challenge of equity and access
for minority groups, these terms must first be defined. Equity is the process of treating individuals
according to an assessment of their current situation and sociological status, with the ideal outcome
being an equal and just opportunity for every individual (Allen, 2004). Access can be defined as
opportunity afforded by the privilege of an individual it is not the same for all groups in society,
and tends to favour individuals who ascribe to, and fit, the ideals of the dominant culture (Henslin,
Possamai and Possamai-Inesedy, 2011). Functionalist theory presents schools as equitable
institutions where all students have the same access and life chances (Henslin et al., 2011). Critical
theory counters this by arguing that schools are places of social reproduction working to impose
the ideals of the dominant culture (Connell et al., 2010). In conjunction with feminism, critical
theory can be used to critique the dominant societal paradigm of patriarchy. This paradigm imposes
a concept called hegemonic masculinity upon individuals (Connell, 1987). According to Connell
(1987), hegemonic masculinity features heterosexuality as one of its defining traits. Individuals
who do not conform to the norm of being heterosexual can be met with violence, social exclusion
and dismissive attitudes from teachers, peers and parents (Ullman, 2014).

Hegemonic masculinity, and the way it helps to marginalised LGBT individuals, can also be
explored through a feminist perspective. Feminism views hegemonic masculinity as potentially
damaging to all individuals, but especially for those who deviate from its ideals (Connell, 1987).
Another theory that can be used to explore the effects of hegemonic masculinity is post-
structuralism. Post-structualist theory encompasses the idea that symbolic representation has power
(Connell et al., 2010). This symbolic power is used to perpetuate social reproduction. That is, it is
used to maintain the pre-existing inequities of society. Ullman (2014) states that LGBT students feel
disconnected from schooling as a result of the lack of LGBT representation in school content, a lack
of support for LGBT individuals from teachers, and the normalisation of heterosexuality. In
addition, one of functionalism's core ideals is 'difference as deficit' individuals who differ from
societal norms are marginalised (Henslin et al., 2011). In conjunction with hegemony,
functionalism labels LGBT individuals as 'deficit', thus aiding in their marginalisation.

LGBT students are marginalised on the basis of their sexuality (in the case of lesbian, gay and
bisexual individuals) and; gender (in the case of transgender individuals). LGBT students who do
not feel they are adequately supported by teachers tend to exhibit a higher rate of academic
disadvantage and disconnect (Ullman, 2014, Conclusions) than their heterosexual classmates.
Ullman also states that schools which contain LGBT-supportive teachers report less incidents of
harassment, better mental well-being, and better engagement of LGBT students. Teacher protection
and support can manifest in the form of using LGBT-inclusive resources, normalising
homosexuality through speech, and challenging homophobic concepts (NSWTF, 2010). The impact
these attitudes and behaviours exemplifies the importance of teacher habitus and pedagogy on the
access and life chances of their students.

The current dominant discourse concerning LGBT individuals in Australia is reflected in the rights
afforded to those individuals on the basis of their sexuality or gender. In wider Australian society,
LGBT individuals suffer violence, social exclusion and a lack of representation. Despite the
existence of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), LGBT individuals do not have access to the
same rights as non- LGBT individuals. One of the more obvious examples would be marriage
rights; individuals can not legally marry in Australia if they and their partner legally identify as the
same gender (Attorney-General's Office, 2015). This is the result of hegemonic masculinity
normalising heterosexuality and, perpetuating violence and exclusion on non-conforming
individuals (Connell, 1987) . That is, hegemony perpetuates the marginalisation of LGBT students,
which results in LGBT students suffering from academic disadvantage and disconnect (Ullman,
2014, Conclusions). This disconnect would further disadvantage LGBT students - a lack of
education corresponds with a lack of access and life chances (Henslin et al., 2011).

The current dominant discourse for education in Australia is neoliberalism (Saltmarsh, 2007). This
framework places value on outcomes and monetary aspects of educational institutions. This is
reflected in the emergence of the MySchool website, and the increase of standardised testing to
further inform said website (Smyth, 2014). Standardised tests are intended to be equal, but giving
every student regardless of sexuality or the multitude of other factors which influence their test
scores the same test is not equitable. Neoliberalist ideals coincide with some ideals of
functionalism as it assumes that education is external to individual and constraining his/her
behavior (King, 1983, p. 16). This is problematic as an educational framework as it ignores the
marginalisation of minority groups, and the inequity and difference in access that students face.
Smyth (2014) states that neoliberalism is counter-intuitive for student learning, even claiming that
the approach further marginalises already marginalised students from school and learning. Smyth's
statements exemplify the importance of teacher habitus and pedagogy on student learning. Despite
the political pressures of neoliberalist policies, it is imperative that teachers are responsive to the
diversity and needs of their students. Bourdieu's theory of symbolic violence in education provides
reasoning behind these statements.

Bourdieu posits the idea of capital as power where capital is defined by the dominant culture, and
thus perpetuates the ideals of the dominant culture (Henslin et al., 2011). As the dominant culture is
currently imposes hegemonic masculinity on individuals giving rise to the normalisation of
heterosexuality (Connell, 1987). Therefore, LGBT individuals are marginalised this occurs
through symbolic violence (Henslin et al., 2011). To reiterate, symbolic capital is determined by the
dominant culture, and individuals who do not conform to the ideals of the dominant culture are
marginalised. In schools, this can be seen in the heterosexual bias of the curriculum, and attitudes of
teachers and peers (Connell et al., 2010). The normalisation of heterosexuality in schools also
normalises the concept of LGBT individuals as 'other' and 'unnatural'. These connotations are
damaging to LGBT students, and without supportive teachers who are reflexive of their habitus and
pedagogy - thus subverting the ideals which impose symbolic violence upon LGBT individuals -
those students will continue to be marginalised on the basis of their sexuality (NSWTF, 2010). That
is, teachers who are reflexive of their habitus and pedagogy are capable of making great impact
upon the access and life chances of LGBT students. This is especially important when the negative
connotations ascribed to LGBT individuals gives rise to other forms of violence (Ullman, 2014).
These other forms of violence tend to lead to the disengagement of LGBT students from schooling,
thus decreasing their cultural capital, their access and leading to further marginalisation. This can
lead to a lack of access for students as education functions as a form of power (Connell et al., 2010).

As the jurisdiction of schools is determined by state goverments, each state contains its own policies
in relation to the topic of the LGBT community. This essay will focus primarily on the policies in
New South Wales (NSW). NSW's Department of Education and Training (DET) has anti-bullying
policies which identify bullying on the basis of homosexuality as discriminatory (DET, 2013). The
document states that the responsibilities of teachers include the delivery of curriculum and
pedagogy that supports students to develop an understanding of bullying and its impact on
individuals and the broader community (DET, 2013, School Staff). While this appears to be a
positive policy in terms of reaching equity of access, it is not specific and offers very little support
for implementation.

While the DET does provide curriculum support, with a multitude of resources concerning sexual
health and the LGBT community, this is solely for the Health and Physical Development subjects
(Curriculum Support, 2011). For other subjects, there is no explicit instruction to include LGBT
representation. The NSW Teacher's Federation (NSWTF) has a lot of impact on its members. It has
specific strategies for teachers to deal with homophobia and transphobia (NSWTF, 2010). These
strategies permeate in-class activities and teacher attitudes. Examples of these strategies are to label
and specifically address homophobia, using resources which utilise LGBT representation,
challenging the heterosexual 'default' and being visible as an ally (NSWTF, 2010). In addition, the
federal programme SafeSchools clearly illustrates methods for teachers to create teaching and
learning communities where all members of the school community feel secure from harassment,
aggression, violence and bullying (SafeSchools, 2014). SafeSchools contains resources for
assessments of school safety, and resources for teachers, specialists and pre-service teachers to use
in their pedagogy. The aforementioned institutions contain vast and comprehensive resources, and
their policies are conducive to increasing the access of LGBT students. However, their influence on
schooling communities is limited; it relies mostly of the willingness of teachers to reflexively
integrate the given values into their pedagogy (Allen, 2004).

As a pre-service teacher, it is important for the author to be reflexive in their practice. The author
was raised in a middle-class family with parents who have completed formal tertiary education. In
addition, the author recognises that they would have internalised some problematic ideals, and thus
their habitus is potentially problematic. While they have done their best to unlearn the behaviours
which stem from these attitudes, the author is aware that it is still possible that such attitudes remain
internalised. These internalised biases would be harmful to not only future students, but all
individuals the author would interact with. The author recognises that they are capable of
contributing to social reproduction as they generally conform to the ideals of the current dominant
culture. However, the author's interest in sociology and social justice has resulted and will
continue to result - in the subversion of the dominant culture where the ideals of the dominant
culture are deemed harmful in accordance with critical theory. That is, the author aims to be
reflexive in their habitus and pedagogy, as they are aware of the impact such aspects can make on
student access and life chances.

In conclusion, the diversity in Australian schools requires teachers to have an understanding of the
different levels of equity and access minority groups face, and how this may manifest in the
classroom (Allen, 2004). Teachers need to be reflexive of their habitus and how that affects their
pedagogy. In turn, teachers need to be aware of how these aspects influence the access and equity
of their students. The effects of this reflexivity manifests in the form of LGBT representation in the
curriculum and open support for these students which results in higher retention rates, lower rates
of violence (symbolic and otherwise), better mental wellbeing for LGBT students, peer acceptance
and support, and higher levels of student engagement from LGBT students (Ullman, 2014). The
sociological frameworks of feminism, functionalism, post-structuralism, Bourdieu's theories of
symbolic violence and critical theory are useful in understanding the marginalisation of individuals
based on their sexuality. Feminism and imposition of hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 1987);
functionalism and the concept of 'difference as deficit' (Henslin et al., 2011); post-structualism and
the power of symbolic interactions and; Bourdieu's symbolic violence and the othering of LGBT
individuals, especially in schools which work to reproduce the ideals of the dominant culture
(Connell et al., 2010). The educational policies discussed in this essay are solid foundations for
dealing with student diversity. They exemplify the importance of the ability of teachers to be
reflexive in their habitus and pedagogy. The policies also emphasise the influence these aspects
have on student access and their life chances.
 References
Allen, J. (Ed.). (2004). Sociology of Education: Possibilities and Practices. South Melbourne,
Australia: CENGAGE Learning.
Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW). Available from www.austlii.edu.au
Attorney-General's Office. (2015). Getting married. Attorney-General's Office. Retrieved August
12, 2016, from https://www.ag.gov.au/FamiliesAndMarriage/Marriage/Pages/Getting-
married.aspx
Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: society, the person and sexual politics. California, USA:
Stanford University Press.
Connell, R. W., Campell, C., Vickers, M., Welch, A., Foley, D., Bagnall, N., & Hayes, D. (2010).
Education, Change and Society. (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University
Press.
Curriculum Support. (2011). Curriculum support: Anti-homophobia education in PDHPE. New
South Wales Department of Education and Communities. Retrieved August 11, 2016, from
www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/secondary/pdhpe/assets/pdf/dis_001.pdf
Department of Education and Training. (2013). Bullying: Preventing and Responding to Student
Bullying in Schools Policy. New South Wales government. Retrieved August 10, 2016, from
https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/policies/student_serv/discipline/bullying/PD20100415.shtml
Hattie, J., (2004). It's official: teachers make a difference. Educare News, 144, 2431. Retrieved
from http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/fullText;dn=132958;res=AEIPT
Henslin, J. M., Possamai, A., & Possamai-Inesedy, A. (2011). Sociology: A down-to-earth
approach. Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson Australia.
King, R. (1983). The Sociology of School Organization. London and New York: The Chaucer Press.

New South Wales Teacher's Federation. (2010). Supporting people of diverse sexuality and genders
in education. NSWTF. Retrieved August 10, 2016, from https://www.nswtf.org.au/
files/infoleaflet_supporting_people_of_diverse_sexuality_and_genders_in_education.pdf

SafeSchools. (2014). Safe Schools Toolkit. Australian Government Department of Education and
Training. Retrieved August 11, 2016, from http://safeschoolshub.edu.au/safe-schools-
toolkit/overview
Saltmarsh, S. (2007). Cultural complicities: Elitism, heteronormativity and violence in the
education marketplace. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20(3),
335-354. doi: 10.1080/09518390701281934
Smyth, J. (2014). Improving schools in poor areas: It's not about the organisation, structures and
privatisation, stupid! Improving Schools, 17(3), 231-240. doi: 10.1177/1365480214556418
Ullman, J. (2014). Ladylike/butch, sporty/dapper: exploring gender climate with Australian
LGBTQ students using stageenvironment fit theory. Sex education, 14(4), 430443. doi:
10.1080/14681811.2014.919912