As DOE and Title IX Are Dismantled, The Promise of Equal Opportunity Is at Risk – The 74

Report on U.S. Education Policy Shifts and Their Conflict with Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Recent federal policy shifts, including the reversion to 2020 Title IX regulations and proposals to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, present a significant threat to gender equity and educational access. These actions directly contravene the principles of several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This report analyzes these changes and their detrimental impact on SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Analysis of Recent Policy Changes and SDG Conflicts

Reversion of Title IX Regulations and Impact on SDG 5

The reinstatement of the 2020 Title IX rule creates substantial barriers for survivors of sexual violence, undermining progress toward SDG 5 (Gender Equality). The rule weakens protections by:

• Establishing burdensome standards of proof for harassment and assault claims.
• Narrowing the legal definition of what constitutes sexual harassment and assault.
• Limiting the authority of educational institutions to conduct prompt and thorough investigations, discouraging reporting and perpetuating a culture of silence.

Institutional Weakening and its Impact on SDG 16

Proposals to shutter the U.S. Department of Education or strip its Office of Civil Rights represent a direct assault on SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The dismantling of this federal oversight would lead to:

• A lack of monitoring for school compliance with civil rights laws like Title IX.
• An erosion of accountability mechanisms, emboldening institutions to violate the law without consequence.

–

• A systemic failure to protect students, as many state and local agencies lack the resources or political will to enforce these protections adequately.

Department of Energy Regulatory Rollbacks

The Department of Energy has initiated steps to rescind Title IX civil rights protections in its funded programs. This action specifically threatens progress toward SDG 5 and SDG 4 by:

• Discouraging institutional efforts to address gender disparities in STEM fields, where women remain underrepresented.
• Weakening the foundation for equal participation in federally funded educational and athletic programs.
• Bypassing traditional public notice and comment periods, raising concerns about transparency and legality.

Long-Term Consequences for Sustainable Development

Erosion of SDG 4: Quality Education

A core tenet of SDG 4 is the provision of safe, inclusive, and equitable learning environments. The current policy trajectory compromises this goal by making educational settings less safe for survivors of violence and students from marginalized groups. Without institutional accountability, students may experience long-term trauma, academic setbacks, or even drop out, disrupting their educational and career trajectories.

Setbacks for SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The policy changes disproportionately affect students from already marginalized groups, including women, LGBTQ students, and those from ethnic and racial minorities. By weakening the very protections designed to ensure fair and equal access to education, these actions exacerbate existing disparities, working in direct opposition to SDG 10, which aims to reduce inequality.

Economic Implications and Contradiction of SDG 8

Discrimination in education has direct economic consequences, undermining SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth). The long-term impacts include:

1. Career Disruption: Fewer opportunities to pursue education, particularly in high-paying fields, deepens gender and racial wage gaps over time.
2. Perpetuation of Harmful Norms: When discriminatory behaviors are accepted in schools, they can carry over into professional settings, perpetuating harmful work environments and hindering economic equality.

Recommendations for Upholding SDG Commitments

A Path Forward Centered on Justice and Equality

To align with international commitments to the Sustainable Development Goals, a reversal of these policies is required. The following actions are necessary to re-establish a commitment to justice, fairness, and support within the U.S. educational system:

• Reinstate and strengthen Title IX protections with a primary focus on the rights and support of survivors.
• Ensure the U.S. Department of Education and its Office of Civil Rights are fully empowered to enforce civil rights law, thereby upholding the principles of SDG 16.
• Promote policies that actively combat sex discrimination in all educational programs to advance SDG 4, SDG 5, and SDG 10.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  The article is centered on the educational system, specifically how changes to Title IX regulations affect students’ access to a safe and equitable learning environment. It discusses how these changes could disrupt education, particularly for women and survivors of violence, mentioning that they “may experience long-term trauma, academic setbacks, or even drop out — disrupting educational and career trajectories.” This directly relates to ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education for all.

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  This is a primary focus of the article. The text revolves around Title IX, a law designed to combat sex discrimination, and warns that its rollback means “gender equity in education could suffer a permanent and detrimental blow.” It explicitly discusses issues like violence against women, discrimination, barriers for women in STEM fields, and the need to “reinstating and strengthening the protections enshrined in Title IX” to achieve gender equality.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article highlights that the policy changes disproportionately harm specific groups, stating they “deliberately affect women and other students from marginalized groups, including LGBTQ students and those from ethnic and racial minorities.” It also connects educational discrimination to broader economic disparities, noting it “leads to fewer opportunities to pursue high-paying jobs, deepening gender and racial wage gaps over time.”

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

  The article critiques the weakening of governmental bodies responsible for upholding civil rights. It discusses the potential dismantling of the “U.S. Department of Education” and the stripping of its “Office of Civil Rights,” which would make it “harder to hold educational institutions accountable.” This relates to the need for effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels to ensure justice and protect against violence.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

1. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • Target 4.5: Eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education for the vulnerable.

     The article directly addresses this by discussing how rescinding Title IX rules could “encourage educational institutions to address gender disparities, particularly in STEM fields, where women remain underrepresented.” It also notes the negative impact on “marginalized groups, including LGBTQ students and those from ethnic and racial minorities.”

   • Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.

     The core of the article is about the safety of the learning environment. It warns that changes to Title IX will leave students “even more vulnerable” to sexual harassment and assault and that dismantling safeguards is dangerous “in a time when gender-based violence is a pervasive issue.” The goal is to foster “environments where women can learn and thrive free from discrimination or violence.”

2. SDG 5: Gender Equality

   • Target 5.1: End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.

     The article is centered on the fight against sex discrimination. It describes the rollback of Title IX regulations as a retreat from “combating sex discrimination in education programs and sports” and warns it sends a message that “addressing gender discrimination and violence is no longer a priority.”

   • Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls.

     The text repeatedly focuses on sexual violence, stating that Title IX is designed to “uphold protections for those who experience sexual harassment and assault.” It warns that the new rules create a “culture of silence on campuses” and leave survivors with “fewer options and less support.”

   • Target 5.c: Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality.

     The article analyzes the impact of weakening a key piece of legislation (Title IX). It argues that without federal oversight, “schools’ compliance with Title IX would go unmonitored,” and calls for the need to “reinstate and strengthening the protections enshrined in Title IX.”

3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices.

     The article frames the rollback of Title IX as a discriminatory policy change. It connects this policy to unequal outcomes, stating that “Discrimination in education frequently leads to fewer opportunities to pursue high-paying jobs, deepening gender and racial wage gaps over time.”

4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law and ensure equal access to justice for all.

     The article discusses barriers to justice for survivors of sexual violence, noting they “will again face difficult barriers coming forward because of burdensome standards of proof.” It calls for a system that emphasizes “justice, fairness, and support” for survivors.

   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

     The text critiques the weakening of institutional accountability. It warns that dismantling the Education Department or its Office of Civil Rights would endanger Title IX “by making it harder to hold educational institutions accountable.” It also raises concerns about transparency, noting that some rollbacks “bypass traditional public notice and comment periods.”

Indicators for Measuring Progress

• Existence and enforcement of non-discriminatory laws and policies

  The entire article is based on the status of Title IX regulations. The strengthening or weakening of these rules serves as a direct indicator of the commitment to combating gender discrimination. The text implies this can be measured by whether the government is working to “reinstate and strengthen” protections or continuing to “roll back certain Title IX regulations.”

• Proportion of women in underrepresented fields (e.g., STEM)

  The article implies this is a key indicator of gender equity in education by mentioning that rescinded rules were aimed at addressing “gender disparities, particularly in STEM fields, where women remain underrepresented.” Tracking this proportion would measure progress toward equal opportunity.

• Prevalence of gender-based violence and reporting rates

  The article implies that the number of reported cases of sexual harassment and assault is an indicator, but with a crucial caveat. It suggests that a decrease in reporting under the new rules would be a negative sign, as it would “further discouraging reporting and perpetuating a culture of silence on campuses.” Therefore, a combination of prevalence surveys and reporting data would be needed.

• Student dropout rates, particularly among survivors of violence

  An implied indicator of the impact of an unsafe environment is the rate of educational disruption. The article states that without accountability, “survivors may experience long-term trauma, academic setbacks, or even drop out.” Tracking dropout rates correlated with campus safety issues would be a relevant metric.

• Gender and racial wage gaps

  The article explicitly links educational discrimination to economic outcomes, suggesting the wage gap is a long-term indicator. It states that discrimination leads to “fewer opportunities to pursue high-paying jobs, deepening gender and racial wage gaps over time.”

• Institutional accountability mechanisms

  The effectiveness of oversight bodies is an implied indicator. The article suggests measuring this through the capacity of the “Office of Civil Rights” and the existence of “federal oversight” to ensure schools’ compliance with the law, which it warns could “go unmonitored.”

Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: the74million.org