On Thursday, July 13th, a group of New Jersey parents filed a class action lawsuit against the New Jersey Commissioner of Education, 25 Boards of Education, and numerous other public officials. The lawsuit, Crawford v. Davy, identifies a class of students attending the state’s 96 worst schools: those where more than 50% of tested students have failed both their language arts and math assessments for the past two years, or 75% of them have failed one of these assessments during the same time. A little more than 60,000 students attend these schools. Just under 6% of the state’s k-12 population.
The lawsuit has caused quite a stir in the state’s education circles. The New Jersey Education Association thinks it’s a “PR” stunt, quite possibly because their members are in front of these children in these educational deserts. The school board president in Camden thinks the lawsuit is “outrageous.” He doesn’t, however, believe it’s outrageous that there are nine schools under his leadership that meet the lawsuit’s criteria. Not to mention so much dysfunction overall that Camden has become a case study in exactly how not to run a school district. The Superintendent of one of the districts named recently said she doesn’t think the answer is to take away money from the public schools. Another school board member in another district believes we all need to work together and make the public schools better, not abandon them. A professor at a local university believes that neighboring districts won’t take these kids anyway.
Notice something about all of these assertions–something missing, perhaps?
If anything, Crawford v. Davy has given all the institutional players a chance to show just where their interests lie: with the institution. The “something missing” to which I refer is any substantive reply to the complaint being brought to

