and Social Work Practice Among a Sample of School Social Workers 2012 Milka Ramirez PhD MSW Assistant ProfessorSocial Work Northeastern Illinois University Emailmramirez23neiuedu ID: 308038
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "An Examination of Homophobia" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
An Examination of Homophobia and Social Work Practice: Among a Sample of School Social Workers © 2012
Milka Ramirez, PhD, MSWAssistant Professor/Social WorkNortheastern Illinois UniversityEmail:m-ramirez23@neiu.edu
NASW 2013 Statewide ConferenceSlide2
OUTLINEOverview of studyRational of the studyLiterature review
Theoretical frameworkResearch questionsMethodologyFindingsImplications Slide3
IN MEMORY OF LAWRENCE “LARRY” KING On Feb. 12, 2008
Lawrence “Larry” King was in the school’s computer lab with 24 other students. A classmate walked up to Larry, and shot Larry in the back of the head. Larry died on February 15, 2008,
at
the age of
14
. The
investigation into Larry’s murder revealed that Larry was shot by Brandon
McInerney
, age 14, due to Larry’s sexual orientation and sexual expression.Slide4
STUDY OVERVIEWThe study addresses a gap in knowledge about homophobia among school social workers (SSW) and SSW’s practice with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) youth. Slide5
Homophobia23 In this study homophobia is conceptually defined as the broad range of negative attitudes and beliefs about LGBT populations that may lead to a reduction of effective mental health services for LGBT individuals. 5,10,11,17 Slide6
THE STUDY EXAMINEDThe current degree of homophobia amongschool social workers, and relationship between homophobia and use of gay affirmative practice among school social workers. As well as, school climate’s moderating effect on homophobia and use of gay affirmative practice in school settings.
Slide7
STUDY RATIONAL Empirical evidence suggest that LGBT youth areone of the most vulnerable school populations in contemporary society.5,8,15,16
Research also indicates that ideological contradictions may exist between our professions’ espoused beliefs and actual practice behavior with LGBT populations.4,7,10,11,13Yet there is a gap in knowledge about school social workers attitudes and beliefs regarding LGBT individuals and use of gay affirmative practice.
10,11,12
Slide8
Literature ReviewHistorical & Contemporary views of Homophobia1,2,9,14Social workers attitudes & beliefs about LGBT
individuals 4,5,7,10,11,13,22Gay Affirmative Practice10,11,12School Climate8,15,3,5,7,16
Correlates
to
homophobia
17,18,19,20,21
NASW 2013 Statewide ConferenceSlide9
Van Soest & Bryant (1995)Reconceptualizing
HomophobiaSlide10
Theoretical FrameworkBandura(1977) Social Learning TheoryObservationModelingImitation
Hofstede(2001) Organizational TheoryPower-Individualism-CollectivismOrganizational Justice:Distributive-Interactional JusticeSlide11
Research Question #1What is the degree ofhomophobia amongSchool Social Workers? Does it vary by demographic variables that include religiosity, age, sexual orientation, personal contact with LGBT individuals, education and training about LGBT individuals
?Slide12
Research Question #2What is the degree of homophobia among School Social Workers? Does it vary by demographic variables that include religiosity, age, sexual orientation, personal contact with LGBT individuals, education and training about LGBT individuals?Slide13
Research Question #3To what extent do School Social Workers engage in gay affirmative practice with LGBT students? Does it vary by demographic variables that include religiosity, age, sexual orientation, personal contact with LGBT individuals, education and training about LGBT individuals?Slide14
Research Question #4NASW 2013 Statewide ConferenceIs the association between homophobia among School Social Workers and use of gay affirmative practice moderated by school climate? Does it vary by demographic variables that include religiosity, age, sexual orientation, personal contact with LGBT individuals, education and training about LGBT individuals?Slide15
MethodologyNational on-line confidential survey across 42 statesPurposeful sampling (N=283)School Social
Work Association of America (SSWAA)American Council for School Social Work (ACSSW) Affiliates of SWAA and CSSWSlide16
CONCEPTUAL MODELSlide17
Sample CharacteristicsThe sample consisted of 43 year old, White (74%), heterosexual (85.3%), females (84.2%), identified as Catholic (52%), with a Master’s degree (81%), practicing in urban settings with an average of 11 years of practice experience (44%).
Age (R)21=69N=272Slide18
Non-homophobic views(n=236) (M)66.86 Gay affirmative practice(n=236) (M) 61.62 65% Personal contact (1-10) Friend 55.8%
Family 23%Homophobia and PC(n=236) personal contacts with LGBT individuals(r =.37*;
p
< .05)
Gay
Affirmative
Practice & PC
(n=236)
personal contacts with LGBT individuals(
r
=.
41**;
p
<
.01
)
Personal
contact
(n=236)
Professional
development
(
r=29**;p.<.01)
Homophobia, Gay Affirmative Practice, Personal ContactSlide19
Homophobia, Gay Affirmative Practice, Education, Training Homophobia(n=236)personal contact (r=.37**;p.<.01) self-directed
learning(r = .33**; p< .01)professional development (r=15*;p<.05)percentage of time master’s education
(
r
=.12*;p.<.05)
class
instruction master’s education
(r=.16*; p.< .05)
Gay Affirmative Practice
(n=236)
self
-directed
learning
(
r
= 38**;
p
< .01
)
percentage
of time
master’s
education
(
r
=16*;
p.
<
.05)
class
instruction
master’s education
(
r
=
16*;
p.
<
.05
)
professional development
(r=.25**;p.<.01)
supervision/case consultation
(r=21*;p.<.05Slide20
Homophobia, Gay Affirmative Practice, Religiosity Homophobia & religiosity scale(n=236) (r=-.13**;p.<.01)Homophobia & attendance of religious services(n=236)
(r= -.24**;p.<.01)Gay Affirmative Practice & religiosity scale(n=236) (r= -.16**;p.<.01)Gay Affirmative Practice & attendance of religious services(n=236) (r= -.27**;p.01)
Hodge’s (1972) Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale
Religious affiliation
Frequency of attendance Slide21
School Climate Administrative support-LGBT services in school (n=187) Yes=68%: No=32% Hear anti-gay epithets like; “That’s so gay”
(n=255) Yes=57%: No=43%“Faggot or Dyke”(n=255) Yes
=29%:
No=71
%
GSA or club/organization
(n=248)
Yes=22%:
No=78%
School safe for gay and lesbian faculty/staff
(n=202)
Yes=45%:
No=55%
Safe school policy to protect faculty/staff
(n=144)
Yes=66%
: No=34%Slide22Slide23Slide24Slide25
Practice ImplicationsSchool social work practitioners currently hold non-homophobic views and provide gay affirmative practiceSchool social work practitioners are uniquely positioned to intervene at the school’s mezzo level to impact school climateSchool social work practitioners actively seeking knowledge about LGBT populations, and may benefit from educational content, training, supervision and case consultation about LGBT populations Slide26
Social Work PolicyThere exist contradictions in CSWE’s call for LGBT education content andsocial work education's response, andCSWE’s religious exceptionThere is a need for school policy to address safe school climate for LGBT
youth, faculty and staff There exist a need to develop socialwork curriculum to address LGBT populations in higher education andK-12 educational settingsSlide27
Research ImplicationsThere is a need to examine geographic associations, religiosity homophobia and gay affirmative practiceThere is a need to develop standardized and accessible measures for school climate that specifically examines
homophobia and gay affirmative practice in school settingsThere is a need to develop cultural competency services for LGBT youth in school settings, and identify where school practitioners obtain their knowledge and practice information about LGBT
youthSlide28
1. Adam, B. (1995). The rise of a gay and lesbian movement. Boston, MA: G.K. Hall. 2. Anderson
, J. F., Dyson, L., Brooks, W. (2002). Preventing hate crime and profiling
hate
crime
offenders
. The Western Journal of Black
Studies
, 26(3), 140-149.
3. Allen
-
Meares
, P., (2007).
Social work services in schools
(5thed).
Boston
:
Allyn
and
Bacon.
4. Anderson
, S.C. and Holliday, M. (2007). How heterosexism plagues
practitioners
in
services
for
lesbians and their families: An
exploratory
study.
Journal of
Gay
and Lesbian Social
Services
,
19
(2), 81-100.
5. Appleby
, G.A., &
Anastas
, J.W. (1998).
Not just a passing phase
:
Social
work with
gay,
lesbian
and bisexual people
. Columbia
University
Press: New York.
6. Bandura
, A. (1977).
Social learning theory
. Prentice Hall: N.J.
7.
Berkman
, C., &
Zinberg
, G. (1997). Homophobia and heterosexism
in social workers. Social Work, 42,319-332. 8. Bochenek, M., and Brown, W.A. (2001). Hatred in the hallways: violence and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students in U.S. schools. Human Rights Watch, New York: NY.9. Boswell, J. (1994). Same-sex unions in premodern Europe. New York: Villard Books
ReferencesSlide29
10. Crisp, C. (2002). Beyond homophobia: Development and validation of the Gay Affirmative Practice Scale(GAP). Dissertation Abstracts International, 64, 074.
(UMI No. 3099441)11. Crisp, C. (2006). The gay affirmative practice scale (GAP): a new measure for
assessing cultural
competence with gay and lesbian clients,
Social Work
,
51
(2
)
115
-126.
12. Davies
, D. (1996). Towards a model of gay affirmative therapy: In D. Davies & C.
Neal
(Eds.),
Pink
therapy: A guide for counselors and therapist working with
lesbian
, gay and bisexual clients
.
Philadelphia
: Open University
Press
13.
DeCrescenzo
, T. (1984). Homophobia: A study of the attitudes of mental health
professionals toward homosexuality
. In R. Schoenberg, R. S.
Golddberg
, & A.A. Shod
(
Eds.),
With compassion toward some: Homosexuality
and
social work in
America
(pp.
115
-136). New York: Harrington Park Press.
14.
D’Emilio
, J., and Freedman, E.B. (1988, 1997).
Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality
in
America
. (2ndEdison).Chicago and
London:The
University of Chicago Press
.
15.
Glisson
, C. and James, L.R. (2002). The cross-level effects of culture and climate in
human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 767-794. ReferencesSlide30
16. Glisson, C. and Green, P. (2006). The effects of organizational culture and climate on the access to mental health care in child welfare and juvenile justice systems,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(4), 433-448.17. Herek, G. (1984). Beyond “homophobia”: A social psychological consequences of
the
social construction of gender and sexuality.
American Behavioral Scientist, 29
,
563
-577.
18.
Herek
, G. and
Berrill
, K. (1992).
Hate Crimes: Confronting violence against
lesbians
and gay men.
Newbury Park London: Sage publications.
19.
Herek
, G. and
Berrill
, K. (1992).
Hate Crimes: Confronting violence against
lesbians
and
gay men.
Newbury Park London: Sage publications.
Herek
, G. (2000). The psychology of sexual prejudice.
American Psychological
Association
, 9
(1).
Herek
, G. (2009).Sexual stigma and sexual prejudice in the United States: A
conceptual
framework. In D.A. Hope (Ed.).
Contemporary Perspectives on
Lesbian
, Gay and Bisexual Identities: The 54thNebraska Symposium
on
Motivation: New
York: Springer
.
22.
Krieglstein
, M. (2002). Heterosexism and social workers: An ethical issue. Journal of
human behavior in the social environment,
8
(2/3). 75-91.
23. Weinberg, G.
(1972, 1993)
. Society and the healthy homosexual. New York: St. Martin’s Press.References