GLSEN State Report Card Appendix

Each of GLSEN’s Four Supports is associated with less anti-LGBTQI+ harassment and discrimination, improved mental health, and improved education outcomes (such as a higher GPA and a lower likelihood of missing school due to feeling unsafe). We therefore start by coding policies based on whether the direct, intended impact is to advance or restrict one (or more) of GLSEN’s Four Supports as follows:

• Basic rules that affirm LGBTQI+ youth’s right to an education free from discrimination and peer victimization, where they can fully participate as their authentic self in all activities and programming (coded as “Comprehensive Policies”).
• Instruction, instructional materials, and school library resources that include the histories, perspectives, and contributions of LGBTQI+ people (coded as “Inclusive Learning”).
• Preparedness of school staff to support LGBTQI+ youth (coded as “Supportive School Staff”); and
• GSAs, and other forms of LGBTQI+ youth leadership (coded as “Inclusive Student Groups”).

Next, we code policies as GLSEN Recommended Policies, Partially Supportive Policies, Fully Restrictive Policies, or Partially Restrictive Policies.

Coding and evaluation are continuous, however, to build the initial GLSEN State Report Card, we undertook an original state policy scan to identify, review, and code legislation, regulations, sub-regulatory guidance, and other policies to include in each GLSEN State Report Card. When possible, we cross-checked our findings against state policy scans conducted by organizations listed in the Acknowledgements section of this Appendix. 

Click here to see the full list of policies reviewed by GLSEN when developing this State Policy Snapshot.

GLSEN Recommended Policies

These are LGBTQI+ supportive K-12 education policies that set a statewide standard. By setting a standard, states communicate an expectation that all schools should be safe and inclusive of LGBTQI+ people and provide an avenue for recourse if a school fails to live up to the expectation. 

Generally, we consider both laws and regulations eligible for coding as a GLSEN Recommended Policy. However, as fundamental, baseline protections, every state has laws addressing discrimination and harassment or bullying. Further, these laws can function as a prerequisite for other recommended policies, such as policies that proactively affirm equal educational opportunity consistent with gender identity. For this reason, GLSEN specifically recommends nondiscrimination and anti-bullying laws that enumerate sexual orientation and gender identity.

Some GLSEN recommended policies are not themselves laws or regulations, but are authorized by laws or regulations and set a standard for the content or operation of educational programming. Common examples include LGBTQI+ inclusive state curricular standards and trans-inclusive interscholastic athletic association policies. 

Each GLSEN State Report Card includes GLSEN recommended policies for advancing access to each of GLSEN’s Four Supports. 

Partially Supportive Policies

These are policies that expressly encourage or permit–but do not set a standard–for LGBTQI+ supportive policies, practices, or programs in schools.

Examples:

• Non-regulatory guidance on supportive transgender and nonbinary students
• Model LGBTQI+ inclusive curriculum

Fully Restrictive Policies

These are policies that expressly prohibit local LGBTQI+ supportive policies and practices. 

Examples:

• Categorical bans on the participation of transgender youth in gender-aligned school sports.
• Curriculum censorship policies (e.g., “Don’t Say Gay or Trans” laws, so-called critical race theory or “divisive concepts” bans that target teaching and learning about structural inequality).

Partially Restrictive Policies

These are policies that discourage or create additional barriers to LGBTQI+ supportive programs, policies, or practices, but do not expressly prohibit them. 

Examples:

• Restrictions on the participation of transgender youth in gender-aligned school sports (including requirements to disclose private medical information). 
• Laws that can facilitate forced outing (e.g., by requiring parental notice of vaguely worded changes in student health or by requiring prior parental approval of an affirmed name).