Beyond gender inclusive housing: building a trans and nonbinary residential experience

Abstract Supporting trans and nonbinary students in residence halls is critically important given the harassment, discrimination, and violence trans and nonbinary students face. Further, health outcomes are consistently worse for trans and nonbinary students compared to their cisgender peers. While gender inclusive environments are a first step they do not go far enough. What would it mean for the broader campus community to build a trans and nonbinary student experience in the residence halls, rooted in their needs and center their identity? This article outlines a promising solution by moving beyond gender inclusive housing and expanding the commitment to trans and nonbinary students. Our team utilized a distributed leadership model to thoroughly address all aspects of community living for trans and nonbinary students. This includes staffing, access, locations, demand, and an embedded health model.

Gender inclusive housing is an increasingly available option for trans and nonbinary students.In an early study of gender inclusive housing, residents reported that they appreciated the option of having spaces not dictated by the gender binary but also identified several issues (Wagner et al., 2018).These issues are unsurprising-simply offering a space regardless of gender is not the same as offering a space tailored to the needs of trans and nonbinary students.While eliminating gender binaries in some spaces is a start, a variety of administrative, programmatic, and human resources involved with managing a residence hall community reinforce gender binaries; these systems of management are often the source of administrative violence, such as deadnaming or not allowing students to authentically identify their gender identity on university records (Spade, 2015).
Coullier et al. ( 2018) discussed a broader approach that reflected established practices for living-learning communities, offering a more holistic perspective on the residential experience.Living-learning programs are academic or general interest theme-based communities in residence halls (Inkelas & Soldner, 2011). Coullier et al. (2018) proposed a gender and diversity living-learning community, not only for trans and nonbinary students, that included rallying broad institutional support, connections to faculty, staff training, and programming around topics of social justice and inclusion.Traditional living-learning communities are a great start as they have been found to produce higher levels of programmatic engagement for students and positive academic outcomes (Arensdorf & Naylor-Tincknell, 2016).Learning communities offer an established model, though as we will explore later, given the trans and nonbinary health imperative illuminated in the National College Health Assessment (NCHA) data, they do not go far enough.A trans and nonbinary residential experience is named not as a living learning program, but a residential experience such that it encompasses more than programmatic engagement or faculty connections; instead, by focusing on health and kinship strategies, it is an experience reflective of the wholeness of the student.
The NCHA, administered by the American College Health Association (ACHA), has shown an increase in the number of self-identified trans/ gender nonconforming students.It is important to note that survey tool utilizes trans/gender nonconforming as the selection option for students and that this work utilizes trans and nonbinary, recognizing trans and nonbinary students may select the trans/gender nonconforming option.Identity is complex and how students self identify can be deeply personal and vary.In one year alone, between Fall 2021 (American College Health Association [ACHA], 2021) and Fall 2022 (ACHA, 2021) surveys, the number of respondents identifying as trans/gender nonconforming increased from 4.4% to 5.7%.Additionally, the assessment shows worse outcomes for trans and gender nonconforming students in many areas, including campus housing environments, compared to their cisgender peers (Beemyn, 2019).Owing to the broader campus climate, compared to their cisgender peers, trans and gender nonconforming students report lower rates of belonging and feeling safe and are more likely to report feeling lonely (ACHA, 2021).Existing health outcomes coupled with a national political agenda in the US to attack the trans and nonbinary community through state specific legislation in states like Florida, only accentuate the need for universities to respond with thoughtful, safe, and intentional communities that go beyond living-learning models.How these communities are developed is as important as the community.At a midwestern university one team, composed of faculty, staff, and students, sought to improve the experience for trans and nonbinary students in a way that goes beyond current approaches and literature to build a trans and nonbinary residential experience.

Building a trans and nonbinary residential experience
As a member of the team that addressed this issue, I outline our change process in the hopes of informing similar efforts at other institutions.To make change, our team first needed an include model of leadership that represented the kind of community we are striving to build.

Distributed leadership model
Critical to the development of the residential experience is the team creating the experience.Instead of embracing a hierarchy focused on positionality and power, the diverse team utilized a distributed leadership model to act as more than a programming board or advisory council.Centering student experience means the leadership team would need to replicate the same egalitarian community focused practices they hope to see in the community itself.Distributed leadership is a model that promotes collective responsibility, distributes power among the group, and works through teams, not individuals; this effectively separates title and position from power (Ritchie & Woods, 2007).The team was composed of student representatives, members from a variety of areas and levels of housing, staff from the gender resource center, and staff from inclusion units.Shedding the rigid positionality of administrative systems, specifically their tendency toward hierarchy and structure, was critical to ensuring the planning and research for the community could move forward authentically.Unwinding power structures on the team was the first step to unwinding power structures for the community.Without a focus on power, the team could position student voice as the driver of need.

Assessment
Student voice and themes from listening sessions set the initial agenda for the team.Existing campus and national data were critical in providing further context; campus and national NCHA data were reflective of student stories from the listening sessions and allowed the team clear evidence to share with university leadership.Already existing student housing satisfaction data, which included gender identity, allowed the team to further focus on what the specific experiences was like for trans and nonbinary students in gender inclusive areas.The team sought to paint a clear picture of the trans and nonbinary experience in the residence halls to ensure leadership understood the depth of the issue.What emerged was not only a health and safety imperative, but a fragmented, siloed approach to serving students.It was in seeing this siloed dissimilar approach that the team felt a trans and nonbinary experience was critical; experiences, more than a learning community, are immersive, connected, and reflective of the wholeness of a student.After reviewing the narratives and data, the team first decided a critical and non-negotiable component of the experience was a dedicated, properly compensated, full time staff member.

Staffing
It is not uncommon for universities to employ staff for identity-based initiatives and offices.The key to a Trans Residential Experience flourishing is dedicated staffing with expertise in providing identity specific support.Using existing data on trans and nonbinary students a comprehensive presentation to executive leadership was developed.Funding negotiations began prior to the formal presentation and involved several units to both ensure collective responsibility was taken and to garner support across the university.More than symbolic, collective investment ensured the position was not beholden to a single campus entity and can flexibility navigate the myriad of political realities and student needs.
It could be argued that both hostile political climates and a lack of financial resources may render a full-time team member out of reach for some institutions.There is no doubt that some institutions may not have the option due to problematic state legislators or administrators.That said, where politically feasible, staffing is an investment and choice institutions make as a reflection of their values.A key aspect of the trans and nonbinary experience was the ability for staff, students, and faculty to come together and position their institution to reflect their values by staffing appropriately.With staffing decided, administrative logistics and issues of access became central.

Access
Students were clear: while gender inclusive housing should remain an easily accessible option, an intentional community should have a more involved process for assessing interest and becoming a member.While the existing sign-up process for gender inclusive housing requires reading a number of pages on the intent of the program it lacked a higher level of investment from the community member to explain why they believe the option may be best for them.The ease in signing-up contributed to students joining gender inclusive housing only for a desirable location.Indeed, several students shared their intention in securing gender inclusive housing was specific to a building and had nothing to do with the community.An online application, with the focus of understanding why residents want to join the community, was decided upon and requested by the students to ensure community members selecting the space not only understood the intent of the community but intended on contributing positively.Managing and administrating this process fell not only to the administrators in the housing office but a team of students and staff, consistent with the distributed leadership model.To successfully manage application and access, administrative systems needed to be reviewed.

Administrative systems
Often, existing campus systems do not allow students to accurately identify their gender and it is common for trans and nonbinary students to be misgendered or dead named in housing and broader campus systems (Wentling, 2019).To work around this, housing made a simple update to their existing internal system to allow students to select their gender identity and pronouns.While this information does not leave the housing system, it does allow students an area for accurate representation.This has also encouraged other areas of campus to consider how students are able to identify in formal university systems.After administrative systems, location became a critical topic of conversation.

Location and demand
Students overwhelmingly indicated that suite style options, double rooms with bathrooms attached, were preferred over traditional community style bathrooms due to their increased privacy.The campus is large and students indicated they preferred a central location, close to class and transportation, with facilities in good repair to best support their success.In one study of gender-neutral housing, students expressed dissatisfaction with aging, outdated facilities (Patchcoski & Harris, 2018) so letting students drive the conversation on location was critical to establishing interest.While there are political considerations around access to popular spaces, centering trans and nonbinary voices was crucial.Those political considerations, such as academic programs competing for space in areas, should not eclipse the goal of building a community for marginalized students.Space usage, like staffing, is a reflection of institutional values.Another consideration in location was safety and access to the actual living wing.
A critical element of safety, floor access, was addressed as floors are already limited to card access for the residents.The team recognized safety cannot be addressed in all aspects of the college experience for students in the community though limiting access to the living wing is an important start.The floor was an attempt to create a safer, insulated space from many of the persistent issues students experience related to their gender identity.With an approved full-time staff member and administrative needs addressed, the team next turned their focus to supporting trans and nonbinary health.

Embedded health model
Trans and nonbinary students already experience challenges with receiving health care on campus and many have negative experiences with existing campus health resources (Santos et al., 2021).By first co-locating existing campus health care resources in or near a residential community, steps could be taken to improve this relationship.
For example, embedded counseling opportunities are working to be intentionally linked to the community and located in existing health clinics nearest the Trans Residential Experience.Existing models of counsellor-in-residence programs have shown promise for serving students and creating access (Orchowski et al., 2011).While many campus counseling centers are understaffed and underfunded, the need for trans and nonbinary students to receive care is clear in the ACHA data.The team actively worked with existing health care providers on campus to build this embedded health model formally near, or within, the residence hall community.

Conclusion
Deep into the implementation phase, the leadership team is not rushing the Trans Residential Experience.Honoring the distributed leadership model, centering student voice, and navigating campus politics takes time.Instead of aggressive, administrative timelines focused on production and hierarchy, the team sought to implement the Trans Residential Experience without compromise and on a timeline that allows for a truly authentic, student focused community.