Research Proposal:

Drag Queen Storyhour: An Exploratory Study of an Affirmative Inclusive Program

Tiger Reed

LIS 60050: Research and Assessment

Kent State University

 Abstract

This research proposal outlines in detail a potential study of the nationwide phenomenon of the

Drag Queen Story Hour. Drag Queen Story Hour is a program where drag performers read

stories to children, with the intention of creating an affirmative space for positive queer role

models. The core research question asks: What is the effect of hosting the DQSH program in

different public libraries across the United States? Researchers propose to conduct two surveys:

one for patrons who attend Drag Queen Story Hour, and one survey for staff working in the

hosting library. A short, structured interview will be given to library staff involved in planning

and presentation of the program, to provide context for the survey results. The findings of this

pilot study will help to fill a gap in research pertaining to library programs for LGBTQ people of

all ages, and to promote affirmative inclusive programming for culturally diverse groups.

Keywords: LGBTQ, Drag Queen Story Hour, public library programming, affirmative

inclusive programs, marginalized user groups, queer families, library as safe space, gay straight

alliance (GSA)

Reed 2
 Research Proposal:

Drag Queen Storyhour: An Exploratory Study of an Affirmative Inclusive Program

The research area for this proposal is LGBTQ inclusive programming in public libraries,

specifically concerning the nationwide trend of Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH). Lesbian, gay,

bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) people of all kinds are an underserved

information group who live in virtually every community in America. (Robinson, 2016).

According to Gallup, 4.1% of the population now identifies as LGBTQ, which translates to

roughly 10 million people across the United States, which is up from 3.5% in 2012 (Gates,

2017). This user group is often rendered invisible not only by a lack of materials in their local

libraries but also because there is a lack of affirmative inclusive programming. Empirical

research has proven that there is a need for libraries (Academic, Public, and School) to include

more LGBTQ relevant titles in collection development and that there is still the presence of self-

censorship in relation to carrying these titles (Hughes-Hassell, Overberg, & Harris, 2013;

Hughes-Hassell et al., 2013; Oltmann, 2016; Pierce Garry, 2015; Rickman, 2015). Affirmative

inclusive programming is regarded as programming that focuses or is friendly toward

marginalized groups like the LGBTQ community (Martin, 2017). What are libraries doing to be

more inclusive of this community besides collection development? How can libraries help

facilitate a more inclusive community with this user group and other user groups in their

programming? When public libraries are inclusive during their regular programming, LGBTQ

users feel more comfortable and welcome in the space, and this strengthens the library mission.

This also generates awareness of this user group, legitimizing them as citizens in the public

realm.

Reed 3
 DQSH is a newer program that has been popping up all over the country since

2015. Created by Michelle Tea and Radar Productions in San Francisco, DQSH is a program

where drag performers read stories to children, with the intention of creating an affirming space

for positive queer role models (“Drag Queen Story Hour – drag queens reading stories to

children in libraries, schools, and bookstores,” n.d.). This program is innovative in that it fosters

diversity and inclusivity by bringing straight and LGBTQ communities together, much in the

same way that Gay Straight Alliance (GSA) groups have been doing for years in high school

settings. In this case, these communities come together to enjoy the storytime experience that

celebrates difference on multiple levels. Queer families attend, adults attend, heterosexual

families, and children of all ages attend the program. One queer parent commented on the Drag

Queen Storytime held at St. Louis Public Library, that “it was good to see people who are

different like us”…(Liss, n.d.) There has been little to no research conducted yet to the effects of

hosting the DQSH program both in the communities these libraries serve and within the libraries

that host the program.

One of the reasons that research is warranted for DQSH is that it is a program that

is being conducted nationwide, and thus provides an opportunity for research to be conducted

from a large sample across the country. The research can help to improve the program, and to

create other children’s programs that provide authentic experiences based on this model. The

findings can be used to justify further explorations in LGBTQ affirmative inclusive

programming as well as other culturally diverse programming in public libraries. The awareness

generated by programming such as DQSH is that it promotes awareness in communities across

the country that may not have been there before, and provides visibility for LGBTQ youth,

Reed 4
families, and individuals that may help to cement their place as legitimate citizens in the public

sphere.

Literature Review

There is a large gap in research concerning LGBTQ user groups in public libraries aside

from studies examining collection development practices in school libraries and direct services to

library patrons. Mention of studies centered around the topic of collection development have

been included into the literature review because they shed light on the need for LGBTQ patrons

to be reflected in collections and provide key background as to the LGBTQ user experience in

libraries and their information needs. I found articles and studies both within and outside of the

LIS field that address some of the areas that DQSH touches, covering two main fluid themes:

LGBTQ programming and inclusivity (including libraries), and direct services for LGBTQ user

groups.

LGBTQ Programming & Inclusivity

One of the justifications for holding DQSH in the library is that it is a

public space, giving this event a different type of visibility and offering the public a unique way

of bringing people into the library for a children’s program. Debra Burrington (1998) writes

extensively about this in her article outlining the lengths that the Utah State Legislature went to

bar students’ access to public school facilities when they wanted to form a Gay Straight Alliance

(GSA) in 1996. She underscores the experience of all marginalized groups, including LGBTQ

people: that they all face or have faced restriction from free movement in the public arena, and

are stigmatized when they attempt to occupy that space (Burrington, 1998). The struggle that

many students faced in the 90’s in establishing gay clubs in these public spaces had to do with

Reed 5
the fact that they had the audacity to want to gather openly in public, which in turn legitimizes

them as a group in society. Some DQSH programs have been held in bookstores, which while

may be in ‘public’, have not garnered as much attention from media outlets because they are

privately owned. Holding a DQSH in a public library brings the issue to the forefront because

the library belongs to taxpayers. This is where potential backlash can occur via local media, and

groups and individuals opposed to LGBTQ inclusivity. This excerpt from conservative blogger

and author Amelia Hamilton’s column on the National Review website is a prime example:

“Story time is, of course, optional, but funding it is not. Taxpayers pay for the library,

which means they’re paying for these hyper-politicized story times that teach kids to fall into line with

left-wing values. That’s what this comes down to — a public entity offering programming to indoctrinate

children into a specific (and ideological) way of thinking (Hamilton, n.d.).”

The issue of public/private spaces was also touched upon in a qualitative study conducted by

Pruitt (2010) that highlighted the preference of gay men’s book clubs in Wisconsin to have their

clubs meet in private homes or coffee houses rather than in the public library because they did

not feel welcomed. None of the 37 participants interviewed would want to have their book club

meet in their local library, and cited that they were not represented in those spaces, either in

programming (there was none) or in library materials (Pruitt, 2010.) This is evident in the lack of

LGBTQ programming nationwide, and a passive book display for Pride month in June simply is

not enough. Pruitt (2010) argues that with consistent dialogue, gay book discussion groups and

others like them can help public libraries fulfill their missions by diversifying their services and

materials. While this may be true, the responsibility lies with the institution, not the

marginalized group they could potentially be serving. In the case of DQSH, public libraries

Reed 6
(really their youth services departments,) planning and holding these events are meeting the

public halfway by taking it upon themselves to organize the program and market it to their users.

This fulfils the fourth strategic direction of the American Library Association’s Strategic Plan,

which is a commitment to equity, diversity, and inclusion (McManus, 2017).

Libraries can no longer rely on their mission statements tucked away on their websites

that simply state that everyone is welcome in the search for information. In a recent article

discussing LGBTQ inclusion in parks and recreational facilities Joseph Martin (2017) succinctly

discusses the need to move beyond the non-exclusionary inclusive approach because

marginalized people may still not feel welcome or safe (Martin, 2017). Martin (2017) points out

that if LGBTQ people never see themselves reflected in programming, they will not be inclined

to participate. His article also makes the relevant point that programs that feature LGBTQ people

or focus on LGBTQ issues are not disregarding other people, or intentionally disaffecting those

who do not identify as such, merely treating these patrons with dignity (Martin, 2017). DQSH

features LGBTQ people as readers to small children, whose aim is to encourage literacy and

imaginative play that brings the community together.

In a white paper written for the Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC),

Campbell Naidoo (2014) includes sexual orientation as an aspect of a person’s culture and

asserts the need for libraries to promote a more nuanced understanding of cultural difference via

programming. He encourages moving away from the five Fs (food, fashion, festivals, folklore

and famous people) to include more lived experiences of different cultures as do Krueger and

Lee (2016) in their article focusing on their event Storytime-Palooza, and how to be more

inclusive in a storytime setting. Campbell Naidoo (2014) asserts that when children’s librarians

introduce diversity in programming and materials, they foster learning environments that help

Reed 7
kids foster a sense of self, exploration of the world around them, and to develop cultural literacy.

DQSH certainly meets this criteria of helping children and their caregivers explore the world

around them, by listening to stories from a culturally authentic source: drag performers. Krueger

and Lee (Krueger & Lee, 2016) recommend hosting guests and facilitating community

collaboration to add diversity to the regular storytime rotation and an authentic voice for children

especially when there seem to be few options for representation. Having drag performers read

picture books to children and adults gives those in attendance an event with a person who

presents another valid lived experience that may be unfamiliar to them in their own lives, and

may also encourage more diverse programming in the future featuring other cultural groups

outside of the normal seasonal presentations.

Direct Services for LGBTQ Patrons

There is a general lack of research that directly assesses direct services to LGBTQ

patrons in libraries, but there are several important articles and some studies that have addressed

issues that LGBTQ users face within these spaces. Robinson (2016) presents an article that

articulates the dangers of continuing to ignore LGBTQ patrons, especially LGBTQ youth, as this

user group is still susceptible to safety issues such as violence and bullying. In the 2015 Youth

Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) conducted by the CDC, sexual identity data was included. This

survey was administered to students in 27 states, with 34% of LGB students report being bullied

on school property, opposed to only 18% of their heterosexual peers. A whopping 42.8% of

LGB students reported that they had seriously considered committing suicide, with only 14.8%

of heterosexual students reporting this consideration (“LGBT Youth | Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,

and Transgender Health | CDC,” 2017). Programming that includes at risk youth can sometimes

provide a literal lifeline to LGBTQ people and their families in public spaces such as the library.

Reed 8
Robinson (2016) ascertains that when the information needs of LGBTQ users are excluded from

priorities or shelves of public libraries, the message is clear: these patrons do not matter.

LGBTQ users are rendered invisible when they are too afraid or uncomfortable to ask for

materials, and often ignored in programs, displays, and collection development (Robinson,

2016).

This includes LGBTQ families as well, as Campbell Naidoo (2013) demonstrated via a

quantitative study based on a purposive sample of 39 public libraries that represented where

LGBTQ families live in the United States. Library directors were asked to complete a 15 minute

phone interview and questionnaire regarding services and materials available to this user group

(Campbell Naidoo, 2013). 30 libraries responded to the invitation to the study and many

respondents found it difficult to reach out and identify LGBTQ families as there are no visible

indicators and they did not want to offend patrons. Campbell Naidoo (2013) notes that because

of this fear, most staff found ways to be generally inclusive instead of hosting specific library

programs for LGBTQ caregivers and their families. Some recommendations that were offered

involved subversive storytimes, where the storyteller changes pronouns of characters to be more

inclusive, and this has been echoed by others as well (Campbell Naidoo, 2013; Krueger & Lee,

2016; Nichols, 2016). The results also reflected reluctance or in some instances, flat out bias

against titles and LGTQ patrons in general (Campbell Naidoo, 2013). These findings reinforce

the notion of staff training in public library spaces as well as the need for providing professional

development opportunities to help staff meet the needs of diverse families including LGBTQ

patrons. Any library who hosts a DQSH will at some point need to address staff response or

need for training, especially considering the coordination of the event. Public Safety must be on

Reed 9
board, as well as staff directly involved with emceeing the event and helping families in the

children’s library before and after the program.

Hosting a program such as DQSH is an endeavor that clearly shows the library’s

stance on diversity and inclusion, especially since it is marketed as a youth services program.

This aligns with the concept of social justice and the role of public libraries in upholding and

facilitating a space that is open and available to all. In his analysis of public library services to

LGBTQ user groups in the UK, Vincent (2015) uses the lens of social justice to recommend best

practices to engage in more authentic relationships with LGBTQ patrons. This is in line with the

mission of public and school libraries in general, to facilitate the dissemination of information

and encourage learning for all its users, regardless of their demographic or identity. The

American Library Association (ALA) bill of rights dictates that a person should have access to

the library regardless of their background or views, and this includes LGBTQ people (admin,

2007). Social Justice is concerned with giving every person a fair chance at having opportunities

for economic, social, and political rights (“Social Justice,” n.d.). Principles of social justice seem

especially necessary when addressing concerns of underserved populations such as LGBTQ

young people and adults, to discern what practical applications can promote a user-centered

space for this population. Vincent (2015) encourages libraries to educate themselves, get to know

their LGBTQ community, consult with the community and ultimately involve the community by

making the library a center to host events and activities (Vincent, 2015). One public library in

rural western New York is taking up this approach by taking the suggestions of their young adult

patrons by forming a GSA that teens named the Rainbow Alliance (Stickles, 2017). The Rainbow

Alliance has not only given local teens a safe space to gather, but also the same teens have

become ‘regular’ patrons in the library attending other programs and utilizing library services

Reed 10
(Stickles, 2017). LGBTQ patrons and families who attend the DQSH program may not normally

attend library programs or even be aware that the library is a space that would be welcoming to

them, and as a result may attend other programs and utlilize the spaces and services that the

library has to offer as a result. The goal of the GSA club is to bring people together, both queer

and straight, and the same can be said for DQSH, as it encourages many different types of

families to comingle before, during, and after the program.

The importance of a library space to a youth who are in the process of coming out

to themselves cannot be understated (Hughes-Hassell et. al, 2013). This is a space that is

familiar, anonymous (mostly), and can potentially empower LGBTQ young adults and their

peers in healthy ways. Research shows that a pressing need in both school and public libraries is

that the collection is comprised of LGBTQ themed titles that are high quality and relevant to

LGBTQ young adults (Hughes-Hassell et al., 2013; Oltmann, 2016; Pierce Garry, 2015;

Robinson, 2016). In addition to possessing a quality collection, the library operating as a safe

space for LGBTQ youth was one of the main concerns addressed in a study conducted by

Oltmann (2016) as a form of combating bullying of LGBTQ students, and the respondents

addressed these concerns in their telephone interviews. The study utilized qualitative methods of

research utilizing the interview to investigate attitudes of school librarians in libraries across the

United States Oltmann’s (Oltmann, 2016) attention to the frameworks of anti-bullying, hosting

gay-straight alliance groups in the library, and designating school libraries as safe spaces provide

other avenues in addition to collection development. The results of Oltmann’s (2016) study are

optimistic, but the presence of self-censorship and the probability that librarians with negative

attitudes towards LGBTQ issues simply refused to participate is still concerning (Oltmann,

2016).

Reed 11
 Research Questions

What is the effect of hosting the DQSH program in different public libraries across the

United States? What is the response of program attendees? What is the response in the local

media (newspaper, local television news, local pbs stations, Facebook, etc)? Does hosting

DQSH have a positive effect on the libraries that host the program? Does DQSH help to fill the

gap in public library programming for affirmative inclusive programming for LGBTQ people?

Research Method.

The research method for this study will be a mixed method approach. Researchers will

contact libraries that are hosting a DQSH program via telephone and email, inviting these

libraries to participate in the study. A call will also go out via various public library Listvervs to

involve as many libraries hosting a DQSH program as possible. Libraries who choose to

participate in this pilot study directly will be cementing their commitment to the social justice

principles that Vincent (2015) encourages.

The quantitative aspect of the approach will consist of two separate surveys administered

to library staff and patrons evaluating their responses to the DQSH programs hosted at their

libraries. The number of attendees will also be recorded and compared to program attendance at

other libraries participating in the study as well. Any local media coverage of the DQSH event

will be counted and assessed via charts and tables. The qualitative aspects of the study will

include interviews of staff directly involved in planning and facilitating the DQSH program.

These methods are appropriate as the quantitative methodologies will provide data to

assess patron response to the program to evaluate the overall effectiveness and gage community

response, and the qualitative interviews will provide context for the statistical data. The

Reed 12
population that will be participating in the study are library staff and library patrons who attend

the DQSH program at several different locations across the country. The human subjects that will

be surveyed and interviewed will either be program attendees or library staff members. The

local media coverage will be found via the internet and be included if this media mentions or

discusses the DQSH event being held at the library in that specific local area.

The surveys will be distributed to patrons at the entrance of the program and collected

from patrons as they leave the program via a researcher or library staff. Survey data will be

recorded and stored on an excel spreadsheet with no other identifying factors other than a

numerical system to number responses. Any information stored via a computer will be stored on

a secured computer that is password protected. Survey questions for patrons will include

questions about overall satisfaction of the program, how patrons became aware of DQSH, if

patrons think that the program fits into the library’s mission statement, and if they would attend

the program or a similar program again. Survey questions for library staff will determine general

staff attitude. For example, one question will be: Do you believe this program fits into the library

mission? Other questions posited to staff will determine their level of participation in planning

and give the opportunity for additional comments. Survey data will be prepared for analysis

utilizing statistical methods and results being displayed via tables and charts in the completed

study.

Interviews of library staff who facilitate DQSH will be conducted by a member of the

research team via telephone after the program is complete, within one week following the event.

This is similar to the methodologies of the Campbell Naidoo (2013) study, where he conducted

interviews and questionnaires of library directors via telephone who elected to answer a call via a

library listserv (Campbell Naidoo, 2013). Audio of the interview will be recorded and

Reed 13
transcribed following predetermined questions. Qualitative data will be prepared by transcribing

the audio from the interviews and then coded using open coding techniques in conjunction with

coding software such as Qualtrics or nVivo. Researchers will use a grounded theory approach,

using initial coding/open coding (which takes aggregated data and goes line by line) and then

focused coding, which will group these codes into broader concepts of data gathered (Connaway

& Radford, 2017a). Researchers will also identify in vivo codes, which emphasize the

participant’s voice, directly adopted from the data (Connaway & Radford, 2017a).

All data will be analyzed and compared to responses from other libraries, with patron

surveys counted against the total number of attendees at each program assessed. The data from

the surveys will be assessed and placed in different tables for each question posed. In the case of

interviews, summaries will be written according to how the interviews were coded in each

library. Interview findings will be presented in narrative form to provide context for the DQSH

event. The findings of this study will have an impact as one of the first studies in the LIS field

that deals with a specific LGBTQ themed program in youth services that can generate awareness

and support for similar endeavors if findings show the program has a positive impact. This study

will give researchers a green light for other LGBTQ centered research initiatives and for research

studies that continue to push LIS to grow and evolve as field. The overall timeline of the study

will be at least a year, factoring when each event will be held, soliciting library participation, and

compiling and assessing the data.

Potential Limitations.

One potential limitation for this study is that of bias in the qualitative phase of the study.

There will be structured interviews conducted with library staff either directly following the

Reed 14
study or within a week of the program. This study is vulnerable to cultural bias in general

because of the nature of the study, and that the subjects of the study are or are associated with a

marginalized user group, LGBTQ people. Bias as defined by the USC research guide is when a

person, place, or thing is viewed or shown in an inaccurate way (Labaree, n.d.). LGBTQ people

have faced tremendous bias both in the past and in the present, leading to discrimination and

harassment in a number of ways, from being denied jobs, housing, and services to harassment in

all its forms (“Most LGBTQ Americans experience harassment, discrimination, Harvard study

finds,” n.d.). The Drag Queen Storyhour program highlights drag performers who are

consistently stereotyped in society because of their gender fluidity and general visibility in the

culture. There is no way of completely knowing whether researchers will be biased when

conducting interviews. While every effort will be made to avoid the potential negative and

positive bias of the researchers, this may still occur.

The standard solution to this problem is to involve a diverse group of researchers to

observe the event and it will be helpful to gather more information than one person assigned

(Connaway & Radford, 2017b). The process of analyzing and coding the data with more than

one researcher reporting intercoder reliability will also help to reduce any bias of the researchers

(Connaway & Radford, 2017). Having the interview questions as simple, understandable, and

structured will also avoid bias of any kind by having interviewer follow rigid guidelines.

Connaway & Radford (2017) also suggest that researchers be trained ahead of time, so they may

have confidence in their ability to complete the observational checklist accurately, and I would

say the same is true of those researchers conducting one-on-one interviews as well. Preparing

researchers for the work they will be doing out in the field will help to avoid bias, and to evaluate

Reed 15
the programs based on the data that the interviews and observation yield rather than personal

opinion of the program on way or the other.

Potential limitations also include a general lack of support or funding for this research.

The study may also need more than one year to complete and share the findings. Limitations

may also include the specificity of the study, as DQSH is only one type of possible LGBTQ

program, and geared mostly towards children.

Research Quality.

The planning process will be a meticulous one that covers all bases before any research

is conducted. All data received, both quantitative and qualitative, will be anonymous with

pseudonyms used for those who are interviewed, and numbers being assigned for survey

respondents, designated only as either staff or patron. Any information stored via a computer will

be stored on a secured computer that is password protected. An interrater reliability check (ICR)

will be performed in the qualitative phase of analysis using a second and third coder to code a

portion of the data received, with 75% agreement minimum (Connaway & Radford, 2017a).

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study has the potential to provide empirical evidence demonstrating

the positive impact of libraries providing affirmative inclusive programming for culturally

diverse user groups, namely LGBTQ people. The investigation of a unique program like DQSH

can also impact how libraries can creatively plan programs that bring different communities

within the library service population together, celebrating differences with dignity. The fear that

public, school, and academic librarians may experience when planning programs that overtly

Reed 16
include LGBTQ people may be assuaged with the publications of the findings of the study.

Surely further research will follow suit based on the recommendations made upon the

completion of this pilot study, which will hopefully result in programs that affirmatively engage

LGBTQ people and other culturally diverse groups. Groups like the gay men’s book clubs of

Pruitt’s (2010) study, LGBTQ youth, and LGBTQ families would see themselves represented in

programming, and in turn feel more welcomed and safe in the space of the library.

Reed 17
 References

admin. (2007, May 29). Access to library resources and services regardless of sex, gender

identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation. Retrieved November 2, 2016, from

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/accesslibrary

Burrington, D. (1998). The public square and citizen queer: toward a new political geography.

Polity, 31(1), 107–131.

Campbell Naidoo, J. (2013). Over the rainbow and under the radar. Children & Liraries: The

Journal of the Association for Library Service to Children, 11(3), 34–40.

Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Analysis of qualitative data. In Research methods in

Library and information science (pp. 287–323). Libraries Unlimited.

Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Ethnographic approaches to qualitative research. In

Research Methods in Library and Information Science (6th ed., pp. 1–23). Santa Barbara,

CA: Libraries Unlimited.

Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Interviews. In Research Methods in Library and

Information Science (6th ed., pp. 239–262). Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.

Drag Queen Story Hour – drag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and

bookstores. (n.d.). Retrieved November 12, 2017, from

https://www.dragqueenstoryhour.org/

Gates, G. (2017). In U.S., more adults identifying as LGBT. Retrieved December 4, 2017, from

http://news.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx

Hamilton, A. (n.d.). Tax dollars are paying for drag queens to read stories to children. Retrieved

December 5, 2017, from http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448059/drag-queen-

stories-libraries-use-tax-money-promote-gender-fluidity

Reed 18
Hughes-Hassell, S., Overberg, E., & Harris, S. (2013). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and questioning

(LGBTQ)-themed literature for teens: are school libraries providing adequate collections?

School Library Research, 16, 1–18.

Krueger, A., & Lee, T. (2016). Storytime-Palooza! racial diversity and inclusion in storytime.

Children & Liraries: The Journal of the Association for Library Service to Children, 18–

22.

Labaree, R. V. (n.d.). Research guides: organizing your social sciences research paper:

limitations of the study [Research Guide]. Retrieved November 30, 2017, from

http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/limitations

LGBT Youth | lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender health | CDC. (2017, July 5). Retrieved

December 8, 2017, from https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth.htm

Liss, S. (n.d.). St. Louis Public Library hosts first-ever drag queen story time. Retrieved

December 5, 2017, from http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/st-louis-public-

library-hosts-first-ever-drag-queen-story/article_22051aad-5dcc-5ef2-b4df-

eb6fa1a2d2ef.html

Martin, J. (2017, June). Promoting LGBT inclusion and awareness in programs and facilities.

Parks & Recreation, 28–29.

McManus, A. (2017). Thoughts on equity, diversity, and inclusion in refernce and user services.

Reference & User Services Quarterly, 56(4), 226–227.

Most LGBTQ americans experience harassment, discrimination, Harvard study finds. (n.d.).

Retrieved November 29, 2017, from https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/most-

lgbtq-americans-experience-harassment-discrimination-harvard-study-finds-n823876

Reed 19
Nichols, J. A. (2016). Serving all families in a queer and generqueer way. Public Libraries, 39–

42.

Oltmann, S. (2016, March 18). “They kind of rely on the library”: school librarians serving

LGBT students. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from

http://www.yalsa.ala.org/jrlya/2016/03/they-kind-of-rely-on-the-library-school-librarians-

serving-lgbt-students/

Pierce Garry, C. (2015). Selection or censorship? school librarians and LGBTQ resources.

School Libraries Worldwide, 21(1), 73–90.

Pruitt, J. (2010). Gay men’s book clubs versus Wisconsin’s public libraries: political perceptions

in the absence of dialogue. The Library Quarterly, 80(2), 121–141.

Rickman, W. (2015). 2.5 million teens: Knowledge Quest, 43(5), 22–27.

Robinson, T. (2016). Overcoming social exclusion in public library services to LGBTQ and

gender variant youth. Public Library Quarterly, 35(3), 161–174.

Social Justice. (n.d.). Retrieved October 23, 2016, from

http://www.socialworkers.org/pressroom/features/Issue/peace.asp

Stickles, J. (2017). Rainbow alliance. VOYA, 15.

Vincent, J. (2015). Why do we need to bother? public library services and LGBTQI people.

Library Trends, 64(2), 285–298.

Reed 20
 Appendix.

Survey Questions for Program Attendees:

1. How did you find out about today’s program?

a. social media b. local news media c. library marketing materials d. library staff e.

friends f. other

2. Overall, how satisfied are you with this program?

a. very satisfied b. somewhat satisfied c. neither satisfied or dissatisfied d. somewhat

dissatisfied e. very dissatisfied

3. Do you think that this program fits into the library’s mission to serve the community?

a. yes b. unsure c. no

4. Would you attend this program or a similar one again?

a. yes b. unsure c. no

5. Any additional comments:

Survey Questions for Library Staff:

1. Did you attend the Drag Queen Story Hour Program?

a. yes b. no

2. Did you take part in planning of Drag Queen Story Hour?

a. yes b. no

3. Do you believe this program fits into the library mission?

a. yes b. no c. maybe

4. Are you aware of any local media coverage of this program?

a. yes b. no c. unsure

Reed 21
 5. Did you field any patron questions about the program prior to the event?

a. yes b. no c. unsure

6. Would you consider planning another Drag Queen Story Hour?

a. yes b. no c. not sure

7. Did you have the support of the library administration for this program?

a. yes b. no c. not sure

8. Any additional comments:

Interview Questions for Library Staff involved in planning and the program:

1. How did you find out about Drag Queen Story Hour?

2. What was your experience in planning the program?

3. Did you feel supported by the library administration in promoting and planning the

program?

4. Did you field any staff questions about the program prior to the event?

5. What is your overall impression of Drag Queen Storyhour?

6. Would you host this program again in the future?

7. What would you like others to know about your experience of hosting this program?

Reed 22