One of the more interesting aspects of the GSA movement is the fact that it is typically initiated and established by students. This presents a intriguing dynamic where students sign on to large amounts of responsibility. In order to ensure that GSAs operate to their full abilities as safe, supporting environments, many resources exist to assist students and their teachers build an effective GSA.

The Gay, Lesbian, & Straight Education Network leads this effort by providing sufficient materials that enable anyone to lead a GSA. While GSAs prove an important part of the fight against LGBT-based bullying, there are other opportunities for change in schools, specifically in the classroom. While GLSEN’s GSA training materials provide opportunities for teachers to gain inclusion knowledge that does not form a regular part of most teacher instruction courses, there is even more opportunity for teachers to improve their classroom and school climates.

Typically, when dealing with practitioner-oriented materials in relation to education, the targets are educators and administrators. However, when it comes to GSAs and LGBT inclusion, students take on an equally important tole. Considering the difference between what animates and encourages students and educational professionals, two different articles will be compared and contrasted.

For students, GLSEN’s “Jump Start Guide” to setting up a GSA, specifically part 5, “Examining Power, Privilege, and Oppression” will be related to Project Muse’s “Improving School Climate for LGBT Youth: How You Can Make Change Right Now!”, written by Langmuir, intended for teachers.

Langmuir introduces the need for organizations such as GLSEN, and highlight the efforts they make including the National School Climate Survey, which they claim “[help] inform policy makers, administrators, educators, youth, and community members of the issue and use it to support students and educators in designing appropriate resources and services to combat anti-LGBT bullying and harassment” (7 – 38)

The introduction to GLSEN’s material sets the stage for the guide by asking student leaders to imagine their surroundings. It relates the topics that will be covered to the scenario of developing a photo which helps students to conceptualize society’s different viewpoints and concerns. A mission statement of sorts is offered, something that lacks in Langmuir’s teacher-oriented piece.

Seeing the safer schools movement in this way [acknowledging everyone’s views] is a great step to making change on the huge scale that we need to. Using an anti-oppressive framework, people are more equipped to recognize the connections and relationships among different forms of oppression – and more motivated to work together to put an end to all oppressions. (8 – 1)

As the Langmuir piece develops it becomes clear that the focus of the paper is less about providing specific, step-by-step advice for professionals, and more about defining terms and concepts, equalizing everyone to the same level, and then continuing on by introducing specific materials that can be read in order to continue one’s development.

The focus, however, of GLSEN’s piece is more focused on expanding student’s perception of concepts with which they are already familiar. Very little of the article focuses on explaining what a GSA is, and more what a great GSA looks like. The piece continues many interactive exercises designed to help facilitate wider discussion. The successful reading of the piece seems to be dependent on there being multiple participants working through the article together in contrast to Langmuir who focuses more on developing a direct, one-sided relationship with the reader.

The teacher-oriented article seems to attempt to cover all bases by at times pointing out the obvious, and by phrasing things in ways that make the subject matter accessible to all with the end result being a universally-applicable rule of thumb –

It seems like common sense, but if LGBT students can identify even one supportive educator, their experience of school is different. (7 – 40)

In many ways both articles are similar, and in other ways they are very different – sharing a common goal with different delivery styles and target outcomes. Both place LGBT students at the forefront of the issue, mentioning shortfalls that need to be overcome, as well as opportunities to achieve positive results. It must be noted that the initial concepts of both papers are different, where one is intended to encourage teachers to want to take action, compared to the other which shows students step-by-step how to take that action.

Both papers can be used to inform grassroots efforts, however in terms of accessibility and directness, the GLSEN guide provides a more concrete set of guidelines that can help get people, regardless of position within society, involved.