Coming out in college residence halls: Negotiation, meaning making, challenges, supports

Journal of College Student Development, Nov/Dec 1999 by Evans, Nancy J, Broido, Ellen M

With the important exception of Rhoads's work (1994, 1995), research related to the coming-out experiences of students in college settings is missing from the literature. Although some researchers (e.g., Savin-Williams, 1990) may have included college students in their samples, none have specifically examined the impact of the college setting on the development process that students experience. This study is designed to provide information about the influence of the college environment on students' coming-out process.

METHOD

This study was conducted using a constructivist framework (Schwandt, 1994). The constructivist perspective emphasizes how individuals themselves make meaning of their own experiences. We assumed, therefore, that students would be the best possible informants about their own experiences of coming out while living in the residence halls. We chose not to predefine the range of possible responses students might give but rather to ask open-ended questions.

This study was based on in-depth interviews of 20 undergraduate students at the University Park campus of Pennsylvania State University (PSUP). PSUP enrolls approximately 40,000 students, of whom about 11,000 live in the residence halls. Students are required to live in the halls their first year. PSUP is a politically conservative and rural campus in a part of the commonwealth without the visible or wellorganized lesbian, bisexual, or gay communities more often found in urban settings. The interviews for this study were conducted between the Fall of 1995 and the Fall of 1996.

Participants

Participants included 10 men and 10 women. One man identified himself as homosexual, whereas 6 identified themselves as gay and 3 as bisexual. Five of the women identified themselves as lesbian and 5 as bisexual. Eighteen of the participants were White, 1 was Asian American, and 1 was Latino American. Two participants were British exchange students. Eight seniors, 5 juniors, 4 sophomores, and 1 first-year student were included. Seven individuals were enrolled in the College of Liberal Arts, 4 in Science, 3 in Arts and Architecture, 2 in Business, 2 in Agriculture, 1 in Health and Human Development, and I student had not yet declared a major.

On the basis of their phone screenings and information provided during their interviews, 7 students were categorized as actively involved in lesbian/gay/bisexual (LGB) organizations and activities, 3 were identified as occasionally involved, and 10 were not involved in any organized LGB groups or activities. Based on interview data, we identified 8 students as extensively out (e.g., they were known on campus as lesbian, gay, or bisexual spokespeople; everyone on their floors knew their sexual orientation), 10 students as moderately out (i.e., out to selected individuals), and 2 as minimally out (i.e., out to one or two people) at the time of their interviews.

Procedure

We recruited participants for this study through a variety of methods. Information on the study was distributed at meetings of the campus LGB student organization and in a course on sexual orientation issues. Additionally, the information was posted on the campus LGB listserv, an electronic mail discussion group. Participants were recruited through personal contacts and on the recommendation of residence life professionals and the staff of the office of the vice-- provost for educational equity. Finally, we used snowball sampling, in which participants were asked to recommend other possible participants.