Missing Data on LGBTQ+ Teachers and Why It Is a Big Problem

Missing data hides a simple truth about LGBTQ+ teachers in America. We do not know how many of them work in our schools. Today, more Americans than ever support LGBTQ+ rights. Many also see LGBTQ+ teachers as a source of support for LGBTQ+ students. However, some Americans still worry about these teachers. One common fear claims that LGBTQ+ teachers influence impressionable youth. No evidence supports that claim. But such concerns have shaped the working lives of LGBTQ+ teachers for over a century. This article covers that history, the research, and the missing data behind both.

A Short History of LGBTQ+ Teachers in the US

In the 19th century, teaching shifted from a male profession to a female one. Schools often policed male teachers for signs of homosexuality[1]. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, marriage bars blocked many married women from jobs[2]. Teaching was one of them. By 1920, about 78 percent of teachers were unmarried women[3]. Therefore, teaching became an attractive option for women who formed romantic partnerships with other women.

Mid Century Fear and Surveillance

By the mid 1900s, public fear spread to female homosexual teachers too. The Kinsey Reports played a part in this shift. These reports suggested much higher rates of homosexual behavior among American men and women[4]. Across the federal government, officials interrogated and fired suspected employees[5]. Florida went further between 1957 and 1963. State officials revoked the licenses of dozens of teachers and interrogated many more[6].

Campaigns, Courts, and Current Policy

In 1977, Anita Bryant led the Save Our Children campaign in Dade County, Florida. Her campaign used fears about LGBTQ+ teachers to repeal a nondiscrimination ordinance[7]. That law had protected gay and lesbian workers from employment discrimination. A year later, John Briggs used the same fears in his California campaign for governor. His Briggs Initiative would have banned LGBTQ+ people from teaching in California schools. However, Harvey Milk and other allies came together and defeated it[8]. Similar measures still passed in other places.

Bostock v Clayton County changed the legal picture in 2020. Since then, federal law protects all US public school teachers from discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity[9]. But private school teachers lack the same protection. State and district rules, such as Florida’s Don’t Say Gay law, also create risk. So many teachers stay quiet about their identities. In recent years, some public school teachers lost jobs for using gender neutral titles[10]. The Texas Republican Party went further in its 2026 platform. It called for banning all transgender individuals from working in schools[11]. Our education policy coverage tracks changes like these.

A Simple Question With Missing Data

Laura Bellows taught in the Houston Independent School District as an LGBTQ+ teacher. That experience raised a simple question. Are LGBTQ+ individuals as likely to be teachers as everyone else? With Chris Doss and Sam Mann, she investigated it[12]. The team used two imperfect sources of data. The first was the Census Pulse. The second was the American Community Survey, or ACS.

Each source has a gap. The Census Pulse measures LGBTQ+ status well but measures teaching status poorly. In contrast, the ACS measures teaching status well but measures LGBTQ+ status poorly. So missing data shaped this study from the very start.

What the Data Show

Both surveys point to the same result. LGBTQ+ individuals are less likely to be teachers. About 3.3 to 3.5 percent of LGBTQ+ individuals work as teachers. Among non-LGBTQ+ individuals, the share sits at about 4.4 to 4.9 percent[13].

Only the Census Pulse allows a breakdown by identity category. That breakdown shows transgender individuals are especially unlikely to teach. This result matches survey evidence from transgender teachers. Many of them report frequent employment discrimination[14].

Younger Cohorts Show Smaller Gaps

Acceptance of LGBTQ+ people has grown over time. So younger LGBTQ+ adults might enter teaching more often than older ones. Figure 2 tests this idea with logistic regressions that control for educational attainment. Gaps between LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ adults are indeed smaller in younger cohorts. Therefore, younger LGBTQ+ adults look more like their peers in teaching rates.

This pattern may reflect falling prejudice. However, it could mean something else. LGBTQ+ teachers may simply leave the classroom earlier than their peers. Missing data makes it hard to separate these two explanations.

A Different Survey Gives a Different Answer

Another research team used the National Health Interview Survey, or NHIS. They found that LGB individuals made up 8.7 percent of K-12 teachers in 2023. That share was higher than their 6 percent share of the general population[15]. The team explains this result with education levels. In the US, LGBTQ+ individuals are more likely to hold college degrees. Bellows and colleagues control for educational attainment, but this team does not. These researchers also note that earlier survey waves showed no significant differences.

Why Missing Data Blocks Better Answers

Federal surveys only recently added questions on sexual orientation and gender identity. Researchers call these SOGI questions. Many surveys have now cut them back. Since January 2025, 360 federal data collections have removed at least one SOGI measure[16]. Such removals create missing data across the entire research field.

Because of this gap, researchers cannot answer basic questions. They cannot even state the share of teachers who identify as LGBTQ+. State anti-LGBTQ+ measures are also rising[17]. Fewer LGBTQ+ individuals may therefore enter the classroom. But no one can measure how these policies affect recruitment and retention without data. To see how much we do know about the teaching workforce, read What do we know about teachers, and how do we know it?

How Missing Data Affects LGBTQ+ Students

More youth identify as LGBTQ+ today than ever before. Fewer LGBTQ+ teachers likely harms these students. No study has measured that effect directly, because the data do not exist. Still, related research offers useful clues. Black and Latinx students show better outcomes with teachers who share their race or ethnicity[18].

Students may not know a teacher’s sexual orientation or gender identity. So the visibility effect may be weaker in this case. Even so, LGBTQ+ teachers report supporting LGBTQ+ students more often. They also advocate more for staff development on issues facing these students[19]. Therefore, LGBTQ+ teachers may well improve outcomes for LGBTQ+ students. Read more in our equality in education articles.

How Researchers Can Fix the Missing Data Problem

Federal data gaps will not close on their own. So researchers should add SOGI questions to their own surveys. These populations are small, and that creates a sampling challenge. To say anything definitive, researchers likely need to oversample them. Teams can also advocate to restore removed SOGI measures in federal collections. Each step shrinks the missing data problem a little further. For more on the future of federal collections, read Beginning a New Chapter at the National Center for Education Statistics.

History shows what happens when we look away from these questions. When Schools Closed tells a similar story about equality in American schools.

Agora helps the education community collect, analyse, and report better data. Explore our research design, measurement, and data analytics services. Subscribe for new work on teachers, equity, and missing data in education.

FAQ’s