GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network), New York, NY 10004, USA.
J Youth Adolesc. 2009 Aug;38(7):976-88. doi: 10.1007/s10964-009-9412-1. Epub 2009 May 7.
This study examines how locational (region and locale), community-level (school district poverty and adult educational attainment), and school district-level (district size and ratios of students to key school personnel) variables are related to indicators of hostile school climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth. Indicators of hostile climate included frequency of homophobic remarks and victimization regarding sexual orientation and gender expression. We used data from a national survey of LGBT secondary school students (N = 5,420; 57.6% female; 65.5% White; mean age = 15.9). Results from regression analyses demonstrated that LGBT youth in rural communities and communities with lower adult educational attainment may face particularly hostile school climates. School district characteristics contributed little to the variation in LGBT youth's experiences. Findings highlight the importance of considering the multiple contexts that LGBT youth inhabit, particularly as they pertain to educational experiences.
本研究考察了地理位置(地区和地点)、社区层面(学区贫困和成人教育程度)以及学区层面(学区规模和学生与重点学校人员的比例)变量与女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和跨性别(LGBT)青年敌对学校氛围指标之间的关系。敌对气候的指标包括针对性取向和性别表达的仇视同性恋言论和受害的频率。我们使用了一项全国性的 LGBT 中学生调查的数据(N=5420;女性占 57.6%;白人占 65.5%;平均年龄=15.9 岁)。回归分析的结果表明,农村社区和成人教育程度较低社区的 LGBT 青年可能面临特别敌对的学校氛围。学区特征对 LGBT 青年经历的变化贡献不大。研究结果强调了考虑 LGBT 青年所处的多种环境的重要性,特别是与教育经历有关的环境。