TRENTON, NJ – On August 2, the New Jersey State Board of Education (NJSBA) voted to pass amendments to Chapter 7 of the NJ Administrative Code, “Managing for Equality and Equity in Education.” These amendments, directed by Governor Murphy, have stirred controversy for expanding the definition of protected classes and changing language and requirements related to gender and education standards.
The original purpose of Chapter 7 is to ensure that all students, regardless of race, creed, color, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc., have equal access to educational programs and services. The new amendments go further by introducing additional labels such as “civil union status,” “domestic partnership status,” “genetic information,” and others as protected categories.
One contentious change proposed is to replace the requirement for “high teacher expectations for student learning” with alignment to the chapter’s purpose with specific professional standards for teachers and school leaders. Critics argue that this change may lower expectations for student achievement, while proponents say it brings focus to equitable practices.
The amendments also delve into the territory of sexual education, allowing classes dealing exclusively with human sexuality to be conducted in separate sessions based on gender identity rather than biological sex. This move has sparked debates over whether this approach is developmentally appropriate and fair to all students.
Additionally, the amendments include a provision for “removing gender-specific language,” a step that has been seen as both an advancement toward inclusivity and a potential source of confusion.
Critics have pointed out the potential political nature of these amendments, citing concerns over politicizing education and questioning the evidence used to support these changes. Some see the amendments as a testimony to what they describe as “destructive and ideological intentions” of the administrators.
Supporters of the amendments argue that these changes are essential for fostering an inclusive and fair educational environment, reflecting a broader societal move towards recognition and acceptance of diverse identities and experiences.
The NJSBA, an appointed body, has drawn attention for its role in shaping education policy without direct accountability to voters. This has led to questions about transparency and the influence of the Governor’s office in these decisions.
Funding may be connected to implementing these guidelines, as stated in the Notice of Proposal for N.J.A.C. 6A: 7, and the regulation notes that sanctions may be imposed for non-compliance.
The debate over these amendments underscores the ongoing tension between the desire to promote equality and equity in education and concerns about overreach, ideological influence, and the practical implications of policy changes. It highlights the complex challenges faced by educators, administrators, and policymakers in balancing diverse needs and perspectives in a rapidly evolving societal landscape.