The first domain of inclusivity is language. The teaching & learning environment is a fundamentally social space, in which communication – written, verbal, and non-verbal – is central.

Language is always evolving, and in particular terminology relating to gender and sexuality is complex, nuanced and often disputed. We can see this most clearly when we think of terms which have been reclaimed, or which are in the process of being reclaimed, like ‘queer’.

We know that the close observation of language used by others, particularly those in positions of authority, is a method of risk assessment for safety used by LGBTQ+ students.

Language has tremendous potential to include or exclude, to make visible or to erase.

The second domain of inclusivity is role models. Sexuality is often an ‘invisible’ characteristic, particularly when an environment does not offer the necessary support, or reassurance of respect and safety, for staff and students to feel confident discussing their sexuality or trans identity openly.

University of Birmingham research found that only 12% of students could identify a member of staff who was gay, and 11% a lesbian staff member. That dropped to 3% in relation to bisexual staff members, and just 2% of students could identify a trans member of staff. This poses a problem when LGBT+ students struggle to see themselves represented within the structure of their institution and their discipline, and can doubt their place within the community or fail to connect with it.

More broadly of course, anyone can role model LGBT+ inclusive behaviours, regardless of their sexuality and cis or trans identity, or whether their identity is known to others.

Visible role models crucially signal ‘safe’ people to talk to, and confidence in (or evidence of, to look at it another way) an institution’s community values in practice.

Conversely, failure to challenge LGBTQphobic attitudes has the opposite effect and can undermine efforts to set and uphold community values like respect and diversity.

The third domain of inclusivity is content. For some, this domain will be a natural focus, whilst for others it will be the most difficult domain to approach, particularly for some colleagues in SEM disciplines.

What we include, and exclude, in terms of content has an impact on which identities and experiences are perceived to be valued, or valuable.

Content which truly embeds LGBTQ+ experiences and perspectives allows LGBTQ+ students to find a reflection of themselves within the curriculum and to better connect with it, as well as ultimately moving us towards a more faithful representation of reality.

There is evidence to suggest that exposure within education to diverse experiences and perspectives helps to break down prejudice, and normalise LGBTQ+ identities and experiences.

Different institutions and their respective communities have adopted variations of the LGBTQ+ acronym, as well as unique definitions of key terminology. Most preferred terminology and what is considered outdated or offensive is likely to be relatively consistent, but some may vary locally or by context, and there may be subject-specific terminology to consider. Spend some time exploring the specific terminology used within your institution, so that your teaching is in step with local usage.

Some terms may have been reclaimed, and you will need to determine who can use them and in what context. As an example, you may want to consider the history of the terms ‘queer’ or ‘dyke’, both of which have a home in the academic context but which need to be used with an awareness of their history.

We move then to gender-neutrality, and away from making assumptions about gender, or about the gender of someone’s prospective partner or partners. This in relation both to those within the teaching & learning space, but also in reference to those discussed within the curriculum.

Gendered language includes gendered pronouns and gendered nouns, such as ‘husband’, ‘mother’, and ’gentleman’.

You may need to consider the signifiers used when calling on those in the teaching and learning space, moving away from “the gentleman at the back” to “the person in the green jumper at the back”.

Move to a default gender-neutrality, using ‘they/them’ pronouns for those who have not explicitly shared their gender identity with you, and similarly making use of gender-neutral nouns such as ‘partner’, ‘parent’, and ‘person’.

Looking a little deeper at pronouns now, we should consider what practices encourage and normalise the asking and sharing of pronouns. This is particularly important to consider in relation to introductions, when a new group is formed, or a new person is brought into the space such as a guest lecturer.

You can also utilise tools such as pronoun badges or labels, and the inclusion of pronouns in email signatures.

Consider also how you will role model default gender-neutrality with respect to pronouns and embed it within the culture of your teaching & learning space, as well as how you will respond if someone’s pronouns are not respected.

We also need to consider how we actively reduce mis-gendering in the teaching & learning space, by setting clear expectations around the use of correct pronouns and best practice gender-neutrality.

Practicing until you find yourself comfortable with both the use and correction of pronouns is vital in order to role model inclusive behaviour.

Consider also whether there is any assumption of gender on the basis of students’ records, which may not reflect their gender identity, such as invitations to women-only initiatives or assigning accommodation on residential trips.

There may also be scenarios in which students are effectively asked to disclose their gender publicly, such as categorising student cohort data for an activity on distribution of height by gender, which should be undertaken with care and consideration. Can the activity, which might have originally involved writing data in a column on a whiteboard for example, be set up in such a way that students can enter their information privately?

In a similar way to the gender marker on students’ records, their legal name as held by the institution may not reflect their preferred name.

Many institutions provide chosen/preferred name fields, which those who teach have access to for their cohorts, so you will want to explicitly check what data you have been given and default to using chosen/preferred name data wherever possible.

Particularly important is taking steps to safeguard against the disclosure of students’ legal names, such as when publishing group work configurations, and any published marks.

Consider also what practices might facilitate the sharing and use of preferred names, such as name & pronoun labels and introduction or ice-breaker activities.

Often, well-worn phrases are exclusive of non-binary gender identities – that is, gender identities beyond male and female. This includes phases like ‘ladies and gentlemen’, ‘the other gender’, ‘both genders’ and ‘he/she’. Try to proactively identify and find alternatives to such phrases, and develop a new inclusive vocabulary that suits your context and style.

Where there are not obvious substitutions for a gender-neutral or non-binary inclusive alternative, take a step further back and consider what you are trying to achieve – could “welcome everyone” replace the need for a non-binary addition to “ladies and gentlemen”, for example.

Setting out the expectations for your teaching and learning space can be done implicitly by role modelling behaviours, but as some of those behaviours are unfamiliar to the majority of our community, it can be helpful to consider explicit rules or expectations.

Whilst setting such expectations is likely helpful at the beginning when establishing a teaching and learning space, it’s never too late to revisit them, particularly in response to any arising concerns.

For many, the possibility of LGBTQphobic attitudes arising in the teaching and learning space is a daunting prospect. It can help to consider in advance how you will respond and challenge LGBTQphobia, mis-gendering and dead-naming (that is, using someone’s former name).

How will you respond to an honest mistake, by yourself and others? How will you respond to an outright refusal to respect trans people’s gender identities?

Whilst LGBTQphobic attitudes can provide an opportunity for critical discussion and debate, it should be carefully balanced with the knowledge that debate should not be used to justify questioning LGBTQ+ people’s right to existence or basic human rights, and with awareness of the burden experienced by LGBTQ+ people put in the position of defending their identity and experiences.

Research internal and external opportunities you can signpost to from your teaching and learning space. These might relate to provision within your institution, such as reading or research groups, modules, prior or ongoing research, and extra-curricular events.

Beyond your institution there will be similar resources, and you will likely be able to find conferences, groups or organisations whose whole or partial focus is on the intersection of LGBTQ+ identities and experiences within your subject area.

More generally, signposting to awareness events and sources of community such as university student societies, has significant value.

It may be necessary, in addition to signposting to external support, to determine appropriate support for students within your teaching and learning spaces.

For example, how will you support a student who discloses that they are trans and will be changing the name and pronouns they wish others to use for them in your teaching & learning space?

You may want to reach out to wellbeing and support professionals within your institution for guidance here.

Perhaps one of the simplest additive approaches is to consider how standard examples reinforce hetero- and cis-normativity, and to identify diverse, non-normative examples and case studies appropriate to your subject area. These might be adaptations to existing examples, or the addition of entirely new ones.

For example, it might be that the standard example to illustrate mutual exclusivity (where two things cannot occupy the same space) is gender i.e. that there are people who are male, and there are people who are female, but that there is no overlap between these identities. This erases non-binary gender identities, and is easily rectified by adapting the example to landing heads or tails on a coin, for example. However, we might go a step further and introduce gender as an example for non-mutual exclusivity.

Reading lists can have a significant impact on whose voices and perspectives are present or excluded from the curriculum, and whether students are able to find their identities and experiences reflected in what they’re learning. What new voices and perspectives might be added to the reading? How might we redress any existing imbalance in the voices present in the existing selection?

Significant pressures are often felt here when attempting to rebalance perspectives, including an expectation to retain traditional choices seen as essential within the discipline.

You should also consider whose voices might be elevated despite their anti-LGBTQ+ views, and what that might feel like for LGBTQ+ students directed to read their work. Is there space to have a critical discussion on their inclusion, and any impact on the standing of their work?

Perhaps the most well-trodden path for inclusive curricula, the addition of topics or themes, asks whether there is space in the curricula for a temporary focus on gender and/or LGBTQ+ identities or experiences at some point in the course. Perhaps a themed week or seminar, or even a thematic section in the reading.

This approach can be extended to assignments and assessments by providing within a choice of questions a subset which focus on LGBTQ+ issues.

Particularly helpful if you feel that your knowledge of LGBTQ+ issues within the subject area is limited, or if you know of someone whose work you would particularly like to feature, is to invite a guest speaker to deliver part of the curriculum. Perhaps their research is at the intersection between LGBTQ+ identities and experiences and your subject, or perhaps they hold some relevant lived experience. Of course, they could be a student speaker or a panel of students, and you could use this as an opportunity to engage students with their own LGBTQ+ community within your institution.

Similarly, you might draw from the work or experiences of others at the intersection between LGBTQ+ issues and your subject by showcasing or profiling them within the curriculum. This might be on an institutional level, particularly if you are keen to highlight opportunities for study and research at your own institution, or you might choose a historical or global figure.

For those disciplines where there is not an obvious connection between LGBTQ+ issues and the planned curriculum, you might choose simply to include someone’s LGBTQ+ identity within a profile that serves an additional purpose, or to discuss the value of diversity in contributors.

Whilst inadvisable to rely on supplementary content, it does provide a particularly important route of engagement for those with a significant interest to explore further. This may include stretching tasks, additional optional reading, and signposted resources and events within or outside of the institution. If you are able to significantly invest in this approach, you might explore the possibility of co-creating or supporting the organisation of a student-led event exploring the intersection.

Opportunities for collaboration often arise with museums, libraries, charities and community groups. This also presents the possibility of engaging additional students, outside of those enrolled in the module or course.

Additive approaches also consider how we might provide opportunities for LGBTQ+ students to engage with members of their community with experience to share, or support to offer. This might include careers mentoring, staff/student mentoring, as well as peer to peer mentoring.

Mentorship proves particularly valuable when community visibility is low, and more organic opportunities for students to form connections are scarce.

Identifying content which is cis- or hetero-normative is a significant undertaking, and one that may require external support and community consultation, but is perhaps the most vital additive approach with which to engage. Once identified, how can you remove or adapt the content?

You will likely need to research subject-specific terminology relating to gender and sexuality, and identify best practice, as well as any challenge required to standard subject terminology which must remain within the course. In addition to the planned curriculum, you should also look to the hidden curriculum and any cis- or hetero-normative language you should seek to avoid in, for example, welcoming students to the space and facilitating introductions.

There will often be significant scope for student co-creation within additive approaches, and it is worthwhile to consider at the outset how you might engage students in the creation or curation of content. You will need to balance this with the potentially unequal burden of unpaid work on LGBTQ+ students compared to their peers however.

LGBTQ+ student voices may also feature directly in the curriculum, through opportunities for guest speakers or panels, as well as signposting to community-led resources.

We have discussed featuring diverse voices and perspectives in many of the additive approaches already, including through reading, speakers, profiles and case studies. However, you also need to consider how you will facilitate discussion in such a way as to avoid particular voices and perspectives dominating the space. This is particularly difficult, and ever more vital, when certain perspectives are in a minority and LGBTQ+ students may not feel able to share their perspective for fear of repercussions.

Essential to transformative practice is questioning the assumptions or expectations on which the curriculum is based. Why do we study what we study, and how it is rooted in cis– and hetero-normativity? Once we better understand the impact cis- and hetero-normativity has on our choices, we can begin to imagine what a curriculum liberated from these constraints might look like, and how can we use the curriculum to challenge cis- and hetero-normative understandings of gender and sexuality themselves.

Next within transformative practice is the identification of opportunities within the curriculum for students to engage in critical discussion and debate on issues relating to gender and sexual identities. Opportunities might be identified in advance, particularly if there is significant disagreement between perspectives in the readings, or you might respond to debate arising from students’ perspectives.

Of course, there are significant considerations to be had regarding the facilitation of discussion and debate, which must be respectful of LGBTQ+ identities and experiences. Drafting a group agreement on respectful debate is a perfect opportunity for student co-creation and engagement with the wider LGBTQ+ community.

Building on the additive approach of introducing a temporary focus or themes to explore issues relating to gender and sexual identity, transformative practice seeks to embed diversity throughout the curriculum. LGBTQ+ students begin to see their experiences reflected in content not specifically crafted for or about them, and the non-LGBTQ+ perspective is eroded as the default or ‘normal’. This doesn’t necessarily take the place of the additive approaches, and the two approaches can be complementary.

We covered including diverse voices when we looked at additive approaches, but through transformative practice we may centre those diverse perspectives, particularly as a method for progressing the core objectives. For example, instead of learning about diversity within the subject, we seek instead to learn about the subject through that diversity. Instead of covering intersex conditions as an additional self-contained section, in the life sciences one might seek to teach sex development and differentiation, as well as issue challenge to traditional understandings, through what we know about intersex conditions.

A vital function for allies in teaching and learning spaces is the consistent role modelling of inclusive practice and of the journey towards inclusive practice. It can be just as important, if not more important, to role model the commitment to change and the growth of inclusive practice, as it is to model the end result. Visible role modelling provides others with greater confidence that they will be supported if they take up inclusive practice and are challenged, as well as providing a source of practical instruction and a source for advice.

There are opportunities at most institutions which support those with teaching responsibilities to engage with queer pedagogy and LGBTQ+ inclusive teaching. At the University of Warwick there is a Queer & Trans Pedagogies learning circle open to all staff with an interest, via the Warwick International Higher Education Academy (WIHEA).

There is a significant appetite from LGBTQ+ students for opportunities to explore their identity and community through research, and many find the academic recognition of the value in their lived experience and knowledge particularly profound and rewarding. Many LGBTQ+ students assume that their lived experience and knowledge of LGBTQ+ issues is of no value or relevance within their discipline. To counter this, you can share examples of work in that intersection with your students, as well as any opportunities they may be able to engage with themselves.

Whilst we discussed the imposition of rules before, we might now seek to take a different approach in co-creating a group agreement, in which students critically engage with their needs in the teaching and learning space. This is an ideal opportunity to explore how LGBTQ+ students and their peers can work together with those who teach to create a space in which LGBTQ+ perspectives can be heard and valued.

The curriculum can provide an opportunity for students to engage with social action, coming together to make a positive difference to others. Much social action naturally follows from and contributes to critical discussions and debate relating to gender and sexual identities. Most institutions will offer significant opportunity for student-led social action to contribute to awareness raising activity and actions in support of equality and inclusion. There’s significant opportunity here for collaboration with staff and student LGBTQ+ groups.

In order for LGBTQ+ students to feel safe and supported enough to contribute fully, we must establish a framework of support that identifies and mitigates against factors which constitute a barrier to engagement. Such factors might include a lack of confidence in measures to challenge LGBTQphobic attitudes, or a belief that their experience is not appropriate, or would not be welcomed, in an academic space. Similarly, building a framework to support LGBTQ+ staff as role models breaks down barriers to visibility within teaching & learning spaces.