Predictors of Transgender and Nonbinary Activism among Social Work Students in the U.S.

Overview: Using data from a 2019-2020 survey of social work students, this presentation examines the predictors of engaging in transgender and nonbinary activism. Additionally, this study added interaction effects between adapted subdomains of the Ally Identity Measure and students’ personal endorsement of a Critical Orientation to Social Justice.Proposal text: Transgender rights have come under fire globally, with many historically more progressive laws being overturned (Hersher & Johnson, 2017; Jones, 2018). Concurrently, violence against transgender and nonbinary (TNB) persons has continued to exceed rates of violence among cisgender peers (Griner, et al., 2017). Countries across the world, including the U.S. (Wirtz, et al., 2020) and Canada (Ashley, 2018), have reported ongoing violence towards TNB persons. Multiple researchers and advocates have called for collective action within the academy, political, and educational spheres to address these affronts to human rights (Ashley, 2018; Sinclair-Palm & Gilbert, 2018). As social workers, activism on behalf of such groups is woven into our professional ethics as outlined in the NASW Code of Ethics (NASW, 2021).

Using data from a 2019-2020 survey of students who were enrolled in CSWE-accredited U.S. social work programs (Nf725), we examine the predictors of engaging in TNB activism, including interaction effects between adapted subdomains of the Ally Identity Measure (AIM) (Jones et al., 2014) and students’ personal endorsement of a Critical Orientation to Social Justice (Author, 2021). Four OLS models predict social work students’ engagement in TNB activism: (1) demographics and psychosocial variables, (2) social work education variables, (3) the AIM subdomains and Critical Orientation to Social Justice Scale (COSJS) variables, and (4) the interaction effects of the AIM subdomains and COSJS.

For all models, identifying as queer, bisexual, or pansexual positively predicted engaging in TNB activism compared to straight individuals. Similarly, having a TNB friend positively predicted involvement in TNB activism, as did a liberal political orientation. For the social work education variables, having taken a course on power, privilege, and oppression, and engaging in intergroup dialogue was positively associated with TNB activism. With the addition of the adapted AIM subdomains, two of the three subdomains (TNB resource knowledge and TNB ally characteristics) predicted increased engagement in TNB activism. Lastly, the interaction effects between two of the AIM subdomains (TNB resource knowledge and TNB ally characteristics) and the COSJS were associated with TNB activism.

Given social work’s explicit focus on issues of social justice and equity, social work students should be well positioned to be strong advocates for TNB communities. This is highlighted by several common elements of social work curriculum (e.g., power, privilege, and oppression courses, intergroup dialogue) being associated with higher levels of TNB activism. However, social work programs must do their due diligence in both the implicit and explicit curriculum to support students in moving from passive allies to active agents in ways that affirm TNB individuals. The foundation for inclusion of this content into social work education is already outlined by the CSWE and in the discipline’s Code of Ethics. However, to achieve this commitment, social work programs must ensure social work students are educated to understand their professional and ethical responsibility to address injustice. This includes advocating for all marginalized communities as well as accountability for social workers towards TNB-affirming practice and research.