Introduction

In contrast to certain parts of the world, in Turkey you would be unlikely to hear a teacher talking to a student or a colleague about their own or students’ sexual preferences and/or gender identity. If, by some chance, the topic arose accidentally, both parties would look for ways to change it. The reason why gender identity is rarely addressed in schools in Turkey is the teachers’ own fears, prejudices and concerns. Talking about the topic or being heard when making a comment about it may be considered as evidence or a tendency to non-heterosexuality, which could ruin their private and professional reputation. This silence in schools about gender identity is a sign of a taboo shaped over years of living in a closed society. Heteronormativity, defined by ^{Müller (2015)} as a social construct that unfortunately makes ‘the other identities’ invisible, and assumes that heterosexual relationships are the norm, is dominant in my country.

In her article, ^{Richard (2015)} states that teachers in Canada look for answers to questions such as how to react to a student who confides in that he may be bisexual, or a student asking about coming out. However, it is very rare that a high school student confides in such a way in Turkey. In order to do that there must be a complete trust, but inevitably in an environment where the students have no clues about the teachers’ attitude towards the issue, they keep silent, which then exacerbates the problems.

If, in a country where the teachers have implemented a series of community projects and initiatives on sex education to ensure that elementary and high school students learn the basics of sexuality, it is still considered that the country lacks important programs to adequately address heteronormativity in schools (^{Richard, 2015}), then in Turkey, we still have much work to do. Therefore, the aim of this study is twofold: first, to identify Turkish teachers’ feelings about gender identity, and second, to compare their attitudes with Netherlander teachers. In this study, teachers’ experiences, histories and personal ideas on sexual orientation and gender identity were of interest, and provided a starting point for data analysis.

Why teachers should learn about sexual orientation and gender identity

It is a fact that implicit and explicit messages in support of heteronormativity dominate schools (^{Ferfolja, 2007}). Therefore, by identifying the teachers’ perspectives on gender identity, teachers can assess themselves - what is known and unknown - and increase their awareness on how important it is to have knowledge about the topic, since this is the key decreasing verbal sexual harassment, and even physical abuse at schools.

Sexual and gender minority youth face challenges throughout their lives. Fear about how family and friends may react, as well as fear of bullying, harassment, discrimination and prejudice in school may prevent young people from publicly identifying as a sexual or gender minority (^{Gorski, Shannon & Reiter, 2013}). Supportive families, schools and communities have a vital role in helping these children adapt to school and succeed in life. Unfortunately, studies reveal that our schools still lack tolerance. According to the results of the GLSEN’s (^{Kosciw, Greytak, Bartkiewicz, Boesen & Palmer, 2012}) National School Climate Survey, more than half of students reported hearing homophobic remarks from school personnel, and less than a fifth reported that school personnel frequently intervened when hearing homophobic remarks, or negative comments on gender expression. In addition, 4 out of 10 students often or frequently heard their peers make racist remarks at school. These facts underline the importance of teachers and their perception about the topic. Studies show lower levels of bullying or a reduction in bullying behaviour over time in schools in which students perceive higher levels of support from teachers (^{Kosciw, Greytak, Palmer & Boesen, 2014}).

Another reason why teachers should learn about sexual orientation and gender identity is that, even though it is well-known that gender identity itself is not a health hazard, if these issues are ignored, the resulting social exclusion will lead to significant health disparities (^{Müller, 2015}). Homophobia and heteronormativity are powerful constructs that have both direct and indirect impacts on the health of youth people. When labelled as a marginalised group, such students experience higher levels of depression, suicide and substance abuse, and are at higher risk of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV (^{Müller, 2015}), although actual levels will depend on the tolerance level of their community.

A review of the literature stated above resulted in two themes that helped me situate this study: (1) the attitudes of Turkish teachers toward gender identity. What they believe, how they perceive it and how these perceptions affect their practice in the classroom, and (2) what are the differences between teachers from the Netherlands and Turkey, which are culturally dissimilar, in terms of attitudes to gender identity?

Materials and Methods

Focus group interviews

In April 2018, a 50-minute focus group interview, designed to explore themes emerging from the survey, was conducted with a responsive sample of 10 teachers (five female, five male-6 Turkish and 4 Netherlander) to ensure representativeness of participants. A guide, based on theory and the researcher’s experience, was used for the semi-structured interviews (^{Harrell & Bradley, 2009}). The interviews were conducted by the researchers in teachers’ native language, to decrease anxiety levels. It was explained that anonymity would be guaranteed, and that pseudonyms would be used when citing participant comments. In total, three separate focus group interviews were held because of the location of the participants. The first focus group, with three participants, was conducted face to face. The second focus group, with four, was online (Skype) and the third, with three participants, on the phone. Even though the medium the interviews might have created a burden on the participants, the advantages were twofold. First, interviews increased the interrater reliability of the study, and they enabled the researcher to identify teachers’ individual beliefs on gender issues especially how these affect their teaching. Second, issues emerging from teachers’ reactions were discussed, and this in turn helped develop insights, while also presenting an opportunity to explore issue of gender and teaching from a different perspective.

Data Analysis

Factor analysis was applied for exploring the basic factors of the questionnaire and a t-test (one-way ANOVA) was used. Factor analysis also confirmed that the measurement scales used in the constructs met the standards of validity and reliability. In order to test the items’ internal reliability consistency, Cronbach Coefficient Alpha was used. The results indicate coefficient values ranging from 0.84 to 0.91, representing a good level of reliability (George & Mallery, 2003: 231). According to the results of Barlett’s Sphericity, items with significance value less than 0.05 were left out in order to increase the reliability of the scale.

Results

The study in hand addresses two main questions: first, what are Turkish teachers’ perceptions of gender identity, and secondly, do these perceptions differ from the Netherlander teachers?

Discussion

Because they have the power to improve the school conditions, but more importantly, because they are humans who touch children’s lives, teachers should be prepared to support students of different sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and other identities, such as race, religion, and disability. Different forms of training - preservice teacher education and in-service professional development - can help teachers overcome such prejudices and biases. Education programs and/or Faculty of Education curriculum in particular should include attention to the topics discussed so far.

Gender, gender identity and other subtopics are not only taboos in schools, but in the family as well. ^{Vela (2012, § 1º)} says “As Turks debate the pros and cons of more traditional versus more liberal social values, one subject remains off the table - sexuality and sex education”. In an environment where the concept is a taboo, how else can we expect teachers to behave? One teacher, Ali (32), states that the Islamist rooted, conservative party leading the Turkish government “may think [that] if you talk about sexuality and sex a lot, maybe these kids will become too curious about it”. A newly graduated 24 years old teacher reflects this view, “There is a fear in society that the established values will be challenged by talking about or teaching sex”.

One of the reasons why Turkish teachers are less reluctant to support their gay/lesbian students, might be the lack of openness engendered by the educational system itself. According to the ^{OECD report (2018)} the capacity of teachers to respond to school needs can be limited by weak initial education and training and teachers’ lack of experience, as well as by the lack of flexibility accorded to schools within the governance structure. For example, one Turkish teacher Nurhan (46), stated her concerns about “the hidden pressure” they feel from the ministry, which sometimes causes her to hesitate before she reacts. She says, “I am not free as a teacher, I have my principal, the principal has the district national education director, he has the provincial national education director, and it goes on. Nobody in the system is free”. This might be the reason why Turkish teachers prefer to report the presence of gay/lesbian student in their class to their directors, as a way of passing on the responsibility. On the other side, no Netherlander participants mentioned any kind of administrative pressure, which shows more flexibility given to the schools within the governance system.

To me, the most striking difference between the two groups emerged with the question “How do you react when you find out that a student in your class is bullied because s/he is homosexual?”. Ronald (32), one of the Netherlander teachers, underlines the importance of value training, and warns that ignoring the problem will make it worse. “I can never disregard the importance of the situation. Dialog has always been my best solution. I would talk to the kids bullying their friends and even create a classroom discussion, and make some kind of mediation”. The Turkish counterpart, Serkan (43) on the other hand, openly states that “This is not my job, I am not a counselor. So I would not talk to the kids but send them to the school counselor. I may say wrong things, and damage the children’s psychology.”

In a study conducted by ^{Kuprienko (2015)}, the aim was to find the levels of student teachers’ general cognitive and psychological aptitude regarding support for people with stigmatized gender identity and sexual orientation. It was found that 85 percent of surveyed students at teacher colleges were psychologically unprepared to effectively provide psychological pedagogical support, while as many as 40 percent had negative and destructive attitudes toward homosexuals. Similarities are seen in Turkey, where most teachers state that they would not know what to do if a student come out. Güzin (50) says that “I would not even know how to react to him/her. Am I gonna say OK, or “geçmiş olsun!” (in Turkish “I wish you a recovery”).

Talking about sexuality education, ^{Collier-Harris and Goldman (2017)} very optimistically declared that in almost every country, documents detailing effective educational and structural guidance, content, pedagogies, and student-learning standards have been developed for adaptation and implementation by teachers, and national curricula. However, this seems unrealistic in the case of Turkey, which, compared to most other countries, is far behind expectations. As can be seen from the results, Turkish teachers need much more support and education to reach a future in which all school students have the opportunity to learn and succeed, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.

One of the roles of a teacher and/or school administration is to ensure a safe environment for all students, which implies all children embracing respect and tolerance for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. In order to develop school climates where difference is valued, information on sexual diversity should be included in the secondary, high school curriculums, and preservice teachers should be trained in homophobia awareness and sexual diversity issues.

Conclusion

By comparing teachers from two different cultural perspectives, 506 teachers’ understanding of gender identity and how this perspective difference is reflected in their daily practices. On the basis of this evidence, it argues that, teachers have a vital role in changing the culture of schools regarding support for ‘the other’ students. One could easily assume that the differences in perception is a reflection of the cultures in which teachers were born, raised and are a part of. Netherlander teachers were more tolerant, understanding, and developed stronger empathy with their students, whereas Turkish teachers seemed to be more hesitant about the topic, for reasons addressed above. Even though most of the Turkish teachers expressed their personal interest and support on the issue, they are constrained by institutional and cultural factors.

It is clear that, in Turkey there is a need for action to create schools which are less controlling and more open for expression for both teachers and students. Supportive staff can change the school climate for all students. Furthermore, results suggest that how comprehensive anti-bullying/harassment laws can positively affect the school climate for these students.

There is thus an urgent need, especially in Turkey, for more research that explores how teachers can learn to become a guide to ‘the other’, and the extent to which this increases the student motivation and success. Teachers in Turkey are not deliberately obstructive, but they lack the knowledge to perform this role of guiding students with a different sexual preference. The first step is providing training for school staff to improve rates of intervention and increasing the number of supportive teachers, and other staff available can be the first resulting in a healthier and happier community. It is important to find ways to train teachers with the skills and attitudes that will create more vibrant and diverse schools.