Student Notebook: Making an Informed Decision About Identity Disclosure as a Graduate Instructor
Learning is a social process that involves interactions with others, and effective teaching strategies rely on an instructor’s ability to connect interpersonally with students. One strategy that instructors use to build connections with students is self-disclosure. Research shows that self-disclosure is an effective tool: Instructors’ disclosure of personal information is associated with greater class enjoyment, knowledge of subject material, and engagement in class (Cayanus et al., 2009). However, disclosing one’s sexual orientation or gender identity in the classroom is a more personal and complex decision, and no one should ever feel pressured to do so.
Still, it is a choice that graduate student instructors often grapple with making. That is, graduate student instructors may want to disclose their identity for personal reasons, such as wanting to feel authentic and to avoid being “back in the closet,” or to counteract heteronormativity and gender discrimination by increasing LGBTQ+ visibility in the classroom (Wood, 2015). At the same time, graduate student instructors may fear that their disclosure will alienate certain groups of students or affect evaluations of their teaching because of student bias. Below I summarize what research tells us are the advantages and disadvantages of self-disclosure to help graduate students make an informed decision.
What is disclosure?
Disclosure can include sharing one’s sexual orientation, romantic orientation, and/or gender identity with others. Someone might disclose their identity directly—by stating their gender identity or sexual orientation or by sharing their pronouns—or indirectly, by wearing pride-specific clothing or accessories, showing photos of their partner, etc. Some instructors may also disclose their identity by incorporating it into the course material (e.g., using a personal anecdote about their identity to link real-world examples to psychological concepts or theories). There is no right or wrong way to disclose one’s identity, and choosing how to do so will depend on one’s level of comfort in the classroom.
Advantages of self-disclosure in the classroom
Disclosure of an instructor’s sexual and gender identity actually has many benefits. Students, regardless of identity, report that an instructor disclosing their sexual orientation in the classroom increased their sense of belonging, feelings of connection with the instructor, and how approachable they found the instructor (Busch et al., 2022). Identity disclosure may be especially beneficial for students who share a sexual orientation or gender identity with the instructor: Undergraduate students who have the same identity as an instructor (and are aware of that instructor’s identity), for instance, report higher feelings of belonging in the classroom (Rosenthal et al., 2013) and show increased self-efficacy (the belief in one’s ability to achieve a goal).
Further, LGBTQ+ undergraduate students who had an instructor disclose their sexual orientation reported greater feelings of inclusion in the course and an increased interest in pursuing a career in that subject (Busch et al., 2022). Beyond the pedagogical benefits, research shows that self-disclosure is associated with many mental and physical health benefits for the discloser (Legate et al., 2017). This may be because self-disclosure allows LGBTQ+ people to integrate their gender or sexual identity into other aspects of themselves (Weinstein et al., 2011).
Disadvantages of self-disclosure in the classroom
Sadly, research shows that graduate student instructors’ concerns over prejudice and negative evaluations due to self-disclosure are well founded. Prejudice and discrimination against LGBTQ+ people are prevalent among both college students and the U.S. overall, and university instructors frequently report discriminatory behavior based on their identity (Cech & Waidzunas, 2021). For example, in one study, LGBTQ+ instructors were reported to be less credible by students and were more often criticized on their teaching evaluations (Russ et al., 2002). In another study, a small subset of students reported that an instructor’s identity disclosure would negatively impact their course experience, though this was true only for students who held religious identities with beliefs that conflict with the LGBTQ+ community (Busch et al., 2022). Self-disclosure in the classroom may also be seen as inappropriate by some. That is, it could be seen as “flaunting” one’s gender or sexual identity or as “agenda pushing” (Nielsen & Alderson, 2014).
Indeed, many LGBTQ+ instructors report struggling to disclose their sexual or gender identity in a way that appeases students, administrators, and colleagues (Bower & Klecka, 2009). It is also worth noting that in some U.S. states, sexual orientation is not a protected class, meaning graduate student instructors may not be protected against sexual-orientation discrimination in the classroom. Graduate student instructors can consult this map to see which U.S. states currently have laws against sexual-orientation and gender-identity discrimination in the workplace. Many states have also introduced laws to ban LGBTQ+ curricula and activities in higher education. There is ambiguity about whether disclosing one’s identity would violate these laws. Therefore, graduate students should consider the potential negative ramifications of disclosing their identity.
Graduate student instructors have the right to choose if they want to disclose (or not disclose) their sexual orientation and gender identity in the classroom. However, some students may not be aware of the potential benefits and costs of doing so. I hope this research-based resource helps graduate students navigate this incredibly personal choice. And remember, there is no right or wrong decision.
Student Notebook serves as a forum in which APS Student Caucus members communicate their ideas, suggestions, and experiences. Read other Student Notebook columns here, and learn about the benefits of Student Membership.
Interested in submitting a Student Notebook article of your own? Learn more and indicate your interest by clicking here (logged-in APS members only).
Feedback on this article? Email [email protected] or login to comment.
Bower, L., & Klecka, C. (2009). (Re) considering normal: Queering social norms for parents and teachers. Teaching Education, 20(4), 357–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210902862605
Busch, C. A., Supriya, K., Cooper, K. M., & Brownell, S. E. (2022). Unveiling concealable stigmatized identities in class: The impact of an instructor revealing her LGBTQ+ identity to students in a large-enrollment biology course. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 21(2), ar37. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-06-0162
Cayanus, J. L., Martin, M. M., & Goodboy, A. K. (2009). The relation between teacher self-disclosure and student motives to communicate. Communication Research Reports, 26(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090902861523
Cech, E. A., & Waidzunas, T. J. (2021). Systemic inequalities for LGBTQ professionals in STEM. Science advances, 7(3), eabe0933. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abe0933
Legate, N., Ryan, R. M., & Rogge, R. D. (2017). Daily autonomy support and sexual identity disclosure predicts daily mental and physical health outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(6), 860–873. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217700399
Nielsen, E. J., & Alderson, K. G. (2014). Lesbian and queer women professors disclosing in the classroom: An act of authenticity. The Counseling Psychologist, 42(8), 1084–1107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000014554839
Rosenthal, L., Levy, S. R., London, B., Lobel, M., & Bazile, C. (2013). In pursuit of the MD: The impact of role models, identity compatibility, and belonging among undergraduate women. Sex Roles, 68(7), 464–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0257-9
Russ, T., Simonds, C., & Hunt, S. (2002). Coming out in the classroom… An occupational hazard?: The influence of sexual orientation on teacher credibility and perceived student learning. Communication Education, 51(3), 311–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520216516
Weinstein, N., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2011). Motivational determinants of integrating positive and negative past identities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022150
Wood, C. (2015). Translating gender: Exploring the effect of communicative barriers on trans identity. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.
APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines.
Please login with your APS account to comment.