Posted on 07/13/2006 9:52:31 PM PDT by Coleus
Parents from around the state - including several area towns - plan to file suit against New Jersey and several poor-performing school districts today for the right to let their children transfer to other schools, public or private. The lawsuit includes parents from at least four Camden County districts: Camden, Clementon, Lawnside and Woodlynne.
The lawsuit is a proposed class action on behalf of 60,000 students in 96 failing schools in 25 districts where most students have missed the mark on state exams for at least two consecutive years. If the suit is successful, students in such schools could switch to the public or even private school of their choice, regardless of geography - and their home district would have to pay for it, according to a summary of the case.
Should the plaintiffs prevail, Crawford v. Davy could have wide-ranging consequences. The suit, to be filed in state Superior Court in Newark, will be closely watched by school-voucher and school-choice advocates. "Crawford is a national test case," plaintiffs' lawyers wrote in a summary, adding that "establishing a state constitutional precedent that children are entitled to leaving failing schools" with the cash for their education would be a major milestone.
This lawsuit goes further than others across the country that have argued for equal funding between rich and poor districts. New Jersey already provides equal funding as a result of the so-called Abbott lawsuit of 1985. Throwing more money at failing schools won't fix the problem, the plaintiffs' lawyers argue. The average per-pupil expenditure in the defendant school districts exceeds $10,000 and in some cases is closer to $20,000, far above the national average.
The New Jersey Supreme Court has designated 31 Abbott, or special-needs, school districts, which receive the bulk of their funding from the state. Some but not all of the districts in the suit are Abbotts, such as Newark and Camden. The districts being sued have schools in which 50 percent of students have failed two of the components of the state's tests, or at least 75 percent of students have failed at least one.
Students from schools in poor areas generally perform lower on standardized tests than those in wealthier districts, national studies show. The lead plaintiff is Van-Ness Crawford, a widower with three sons in Newark public schools. The Davy in the case is Lucille Davy, acting commissioner of education.
Based on where they live and Crawford's financial circumstances, his sons must attend Malcolm X. Shabazz High School, where fewer than one in five students exhibits basic proficiency in math. Crawford and the other plaintiffs contend that the denial of basic educational opportunities violates their children's right to a thorough and efficient education under the state constitution, and to equal protection of the laws under the state and federal constitutions. Joining in the suit are Alliance for School Choice, a Phoenix-based group; the Black Minister's Council of New Jersey; the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey; and Excellent Education for Everyone, a New Jersey group that supports school choice and vouchers.
Under the federal No Child Left Behind law, schools that fail to meet state standards for two years must offer students the option to transfer to another public school within the district or even to another district. But school-choice advocates say this is really no choice at all because there is often no room at the other schools and neighboring districts are not required to take them in. "This would actually give parents choice," said Frances Edwards, a spokeswoman for Excellent Education for Everyone, a pro-voucher organization and one of the plaintiff groups in the suit. "Short of shuffling kids from one failing school to another, there is no choice now."
Edwards also said the parties had decided to take on the State of New Jersey rather than the federal government and its No Child Left Behind Act because of the state's clearly worded constitution and its history of landmark educational court cases. "Abbott has paved the way; the courts have paved the way," Edwards said. "They've made it very clear: If the district is failing the child, the state is responsible. Someone has to do something." Jon Zlock, a spokesman for the state Education Department, said his department would not comment until the lawsuit was filed and officials had reviewed it.
This is not about homeschooling, but about school vouchers. An important case to watch, whichever side you may take.
>>> Should the plaintiffs prevail, Crawford v. Davy could have wide-ranging consequences. The suit, to be filed in state Superior Court in Newark, will be closely watched by school-voucher and school-choice advocates. "Crawford is a national test case," plaintiffs' lawyers wrote in a summary... <<<<
If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.