Advocacy Research on Homophobia in Education: Claims-Making, Trauma Construction and the Politics of Evidence

TY - JOUR

T1 - Advocacy Research on Homophobia in Education

T2 - Claims-Making, Trauma Construction and the Politics of Evidence

AU - McCormack, Mark

PY - 2020/2/1

Y1 - 2020/2/1

N2 - Sociology has an ambivalent relationship with advocacy research because the benefits of participation and engagement must be balanced with concerns about bias. The current study uses ten recent research reports on homophobic bullying in British educational settings, written and funded by campaigning charities, as a case study of contemporary advocacy research. Presenting a sociological analysis of these documents and adopting a social problems approach, claims-making processes in the reports are documented and significant methodological and analytical flaws are identified. Instead of objective research, these reports are campaigning documents that seek to gain media coverage and influence policy. Implications for how the reports should be used as resources for research and social policy are examined, and a more nuanced and sophisticated approach to engaging with advocacy research is called for. © 2019, The Author(s). This is an author produced version of a paper published in SOCIOLOGY uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self- archiving policy. The final published version (version of record) is available online at the link. Some minor differences between this version and the final published version may remain. We suggest you refer to the final published version should you wish to cite from it.

AB - Sociology has an ambivalent relationship with advocacy research because the benefits of participation and engagement must be balanced with concerns about bias. The current study uses ten recent research reports on homophobic bullying in British educational settings, written and funded by campaigning charities, as a case study of contemporary advocacy research. Presenting a sociological analysis of these documents and adopting a social problems approach, claims-making processes in the reports are documented and significant methodological and analytical flaws are identified. Instead of objective research, these reports are campaigning documents that seek to gain media coverage and influence policy. Implications for how the reports should be used as resources for research and social policy are examined, and a more nuanced and sophisticated approach to engaging with advocacy research is called for. © 2019, The Author(s). This is an author produced version of a paper published in SOCIOLOGY uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self- archiving policy. The final published version (version of record) is available online at the link. Some minor differences between this version and the final published version may remain. We suggest you refer to the final published version should you wish to cite from it.

KW - LGBT

KW - advocacy

KW - charities

KW - education

KW - homophobia

KW - sexualities

KW - social problems

KW - trauma construction

UR - https://roehampton.elsevierpure.com/en/publications/efdf6056-9dfe-43d1-a89d-b0f43e79367f

U2 - 10.1177/0038038519858585

DO - 10.1177/0038038519858585

M3 - Article

SN - 0038-0385

VL - 54

SP - 89

EP - 106

JO - SOCIOLOGY-THE JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH SOCIOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

JF - SOCIOLOGY-THE JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH SOCIOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

IS - 1

ER -