Testimony on A5874

Assembly Education Committee

December 2023

The Garden State Coalition of Schools agrees that with the sponsors of A5874/S4233 that personnel directly employed by the board of education of a public school provide the highest quality of education for New Jersey students.  In every district in the state, administrators are working night and day to make that possible, but in this staffing crisis, even the most diligent efforts fall short of that goal.  Sometimes they are forced to make the difficult choice of either not offering a course at all, or using online instruction for students. 

My members believe that the ability to make those choices will be limited, if not curtailed by this bill.  This is why GSCS cannot support the bill in its current form.  We are happy to work with the sponsors to address the important issues raised in the legislation, and hope that we will have that opportunity in the next legislative session.  To push the bill through now, when so many issues within it need clarification and further discussion would be a disservice to students.

Bills that are legislated in haste are often repented at leisure.  We can work together to prevent that.

We are particularly concerned about the limited number of exceptions carved out for general education instruction in Section 4, which do not include personnel providing instruction in areas like world languages and STEM subjects, where shortages are extremely acute.  At the very least, exceptions should be determined by the Commissioner, based on district circumstances and the availability of qualified educators.

Section 9, with its emphasis on “individualized instruction” and “individualized student learning opportunities” is also problematic.  Due to staffing shortages, sometimes entire classes must receive online instruction.  The idea that “a school district shall apply separately to the commissioner for each student for whom the district is requesting individualized virtual or remote instruction, can be interpreted to mean that a district might have to make 25 separate applications for a class taught virtually by a qualified instructor, as well as waiting for the requisite “notification and comment procedures” to be completed.  This is an unconscionable burden on districts, who might well opt not to offer the course, rather than jumping through these onerous administrative hoops.

            Some supporters of the legislation may assert that online courses offered when districts cannot find certified teachers in specific subject areas would be considered acceptable under the state’s guidelines for “Option 2.”  This seems an exceptionally broad interpretation of Option 2, which “allow[s] students to obtain credit for learning experiences outside of the traditional classroom environment. These experiences provide real-world connections not available in the school setting.”

          If this broad interpretation is the intention of the sponsors, it should be spelled out in the bill. 

          We understand and applaud the desire to emphasize the ultimate desirability of in-person instruction provided by district personnel. But right now, with districts experiencing the worst staffing shortages in a least a generation, we must provide them with the flexibility to meet students’ academic needs.  No one wants to “dumb down” education in New Jersey, but we must also remember that the ultimate “dumbing down” is denying students the opportunity to take a course because there is no teacher available.