Educational institutions, both formal and non-formal, are contexts where violence against LGBTI+ youth is a worrisome and ever-present reality (FRA, 2020; EU Open Data Portal, 2018). The negative consequences for the victims include academic and health issues, with a higher risk of absenteeism, school failure, dropping out, depression, or suicidal ideation at its worst (Dessel et al., 2017; Elipe et al., 2018; Miravet et al., 2018; Orue & Calvete, 2018). Research has also highlighted the negative impact on the whole environment, which becomes hostile and unsafe. 

Among the educational actions that have both a reactive and preventive dimension against violence, the bystander intervention approach is a common element that has been widely investigated for its positive impact: that is, involving all bystanders to step up in different ways to look out for the victim, break the silence and create safer spaces where violence is hindered by an atmosphere of zero-tolerance against it. Among the most researched educational programs and strategies, the Green Dot Bystander Intervention Programme (Coker et al., 2015) and the Dialogic Model of violence prevention and resolution (Duque & Teixido, 2016) are highlighted for accumulating some of the latest evidence on violence prevention: for instance, they include constant training to all agents of the community, and they understand the relevance leaders’ perspective for initiating change. Overall, these programs start by training educators, from teachers to staff or families and volunteers. Adults, once trained, can initiate the strategies that involve the youth they are directly involved with, as well as the whole institution and all agents.

Considering that knowledge, the Up4Diversity project has been a 2-year European project, funded by the Rights, Equality and Citizenship (REC) Programme whose main aim was to empower young people and youth workers to become active upstanders in the eradication of violence against LGBTI+ youth. Among the most relevant outcomes were the literature reviews that led to the creation of training materials and a training workshop for educators with all the scientific knowledge gained. Furthermore, the project launched from its beginning a European online Network of educators that met six times during the project funding to learn and discuss the main evidence that could help them implement bystander intervention actions in their diverse realities. People from different countries and educational contexts joined the various masterclasses and meetings, two of which took place in the Mid-term and the Final project’s Conference, in September 2021 and July 2022, respectively.

As one of all projects’ goals is measuring its social impact, the Consortium designed data collection techniques to answer the question: Does diversity of educators who engage in dialogue around evidence-based knowledge on violence prevention empower them to improve or start implementing actions that will help their institution and the youth that are there? 

Data collected through 160 questionnaires and 5 interviews with a communicative approach suggest that educators regain confidence in training as a way to improve the education they provide to ensure safer spaces for everyone; moreover, the dialogic and egalitarian learning atmosphere is crucial in their sense of belonging and therefore contributing to the network. Last, they are motivated to put into action different strategies learned in the network and the project. The main implication drawn from this research is the recreation of networks of diverse people who interact in a dialogical way around evidence-based educational actions.

The Communicative Methodology (Flecha & Soler, 2014) was followed throughout the whole project, during the network sessions, and for the current research. This methodological approach has been highlighted by the European Commission for its effectiveness in social sciences, and especially with vulnerable collectives, to analyse the barriers that hinder their improvement and namely to find evidence-based solutions (Gómez et al., 2019). Mixed methods were employed. First, two complementary questionnaires using Google Forms were designed: a pre-test was made to be carried out before the conferences and a post-test was to be filled out after the two conferences. The questionnaires included common elements regarding the information about the research and the project, some demographic information, awareness of violence against LGBTI+ youth, knowledge about bystander intervention and specific evidence-based actions. The post-tests also included questions about general satisfaction, quality, usefulness and applicability of the learning. The majority of questions were quantitative using a 1-6 Likert scale, with only two open-ended questions with short answers. Respondents in the post-test of the second conference were also asked to provide their willingness to participate in an interview. Participants were given time before and within the Conference to fulfill the questionnaires, to ensure their participation. The semi-structured interviews were designed with the aim of deepening how the experience provided participants with knowledge and tools to effectively tackle, prevent and position against violence in their institutions and in their lives. They were asked specific questions about their personal upstander actions and steps to implement some strategies in their institutions. These interviews were carried out in May and June 2022. As part of the communicative approach to the research, an Advisory Committee was created at the beginning of the project. This committee was formed by end-users, such as teachers and volunteers of different organizations and youth ages, so that their contributions could enrich, as for the current paper, the instruments for data collection, to make them more appropriate and relevant. Informed consent was given by all participants. The online survey included all the research information, and a similar document was provided to the participants interviewed. This ensured voluntary participation, confidentiality, and anonymity. They could solve any doubts about the study beforehand. The instruments were approved by the European Commission within the project’s technical evaluation.

Results show an improvement in awareness of violence suffered by LGBTI+ youth and familiarity with what being an upstander means. Moreover, participants felt more prepared and willing to intervene and implement actions than before the conference. The main results of the network are related to the detection of barriers and opportunities for the prevention and fight against violence based on sexual orientation, gender identity and expression. The network has made significant advances in how professionals can transform and promote change toward safer, freer and more sensitive contexts with respect to sexual and gender diversity. Specifically, the following contributions stand out: The contribution of evidence-based knowledge and specific strategies to generate changes with social impact. The increase of actions and motivations towards active positions against violence and for the defense of victims. The use of the potential of each participant in the process with the support and group accompaniment of the strategy. These results strengthen the researchers’ commitment to recreating diverse networks that focus their sessions on what science has proven to have the most impact. The Up4Diversity network debates show how educational actions with a bystander intervention approach can be applied to their environments. One of the project’s goals was to enable the continuation of this network after the end of the project lifespan. This was agreed upon during the last Consortium meeting in July 2022, two more events have been carried out in November 2022 and January 2023; two more will take place in April and June 2023. Regarding the conference theme, this research and the whole project ensured that diversity in terms of sex and gender is welcome and valued in educational settings, with the corresponding benefits in all fields and for everyone in the community.

ALLEA - All European Academies. (2018). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Academy of Sciences and Humanities. https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/ Coker, A. L., Fisher, B. S., Bush, H. M., Swan, S. C., Williams, C. M., Clear, E. R., & DeGue, S. (2015). Evaluation of the Green Dot bystander intervention to reduce interpersonal violence among college students across three campuses. Violence against women, 21(12), 1507-1527. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, U. N. (2020). THE 17 GOALS | Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/goals Dessel, A. B., Goodman, K. D., & Woodford, M. R. (2017). LGBT discrimination on campus and heterosexual bystanders: Understanding intentions to intervene. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 10(2), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000015 Elipe, P., de la Oliva Muñoz, M., & Del Rey, R. (2018). Homophobic Bullying and Cyberbullying: Study of a Silenced Problem. Journal of Homosexuality, 65(5), 672-686. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2017.1333809 EU Open Data Portal. (2018). EU LGBT survey—European Union lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender survey. https://data.europa.eu/data/datasets/survey-eu-lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender?locale=es Flecha, R., & Soler, M. (2014). Communicative Methodology: Successful actions and dialogic democracy. Current Sociology, 62(2), 232-242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113515141 Gómez, A., Padrós, M., Ríos, O., Mara, L.-C., & Pukepuke, T. (2019). Reaching Social Impact Through Communicative Methodology. Researching With Rather Than on Vulnerable Populations: The Roma Case. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feduc.2019.00009 Miravet, L. M., Amat, A. F., & García-Carpintero, A. A. (2018). Teenage attitudes towards sexual diversity in Spain. Sex Education, 18(6), 689-704. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2018.1463213 Orue, I., & Calvete, E. (2018). Homophobic bullying in schools: The role of homophobic attitudes and exposure to homophobic aggression. School Psychology Review, 47(1), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2017-0063.V47-1 Up4Diversity (n.d.): https://medis-dpedago.urv.cat/up4diversity/