Latest news with #FERPA
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Teachers' union files complaint against NM school after questions about student's immigration status
ESPAÑOLA, N.M. (KRQE) – A local teachers' union wants to know why a New Mexico school district is asking students about their citizenship status. The union has now filed a complaint against the district, hoping to get more answers. 'We would like to prevent it from happening again,' said Mary Parr-Sánchez, President of the National Education Association of New Mexico (NEA-NM). Story continues below Entertainment: First-of-its-kind indoor pickleball facility coming to northeast Albuquerque Community: Albuquerque church leaning on faith after 2 members killed by their son Environment: What should New Mexicans do if they come across a raccoon? In an effort to prepare students for real-world jobs, Española Public Schools has used optional career-readiness programs that help connect students with potential future employers. One of those programs is a standardized test called the ACT WorkKeys Assessment. To take the test, students must provide personal information. 'Collecting demographic information on students is not out of the norm,' Parr-Sánchez said. 'Like, if they're male or female, how old they are, their ethnicity, that type of thing. That is normal demographic information.' What's not common are questions related to students' citizenship status. But, according to a group of teachers with Española Public Schools, as part of the assessment, the district directed teachers at Española Valley High School to ask students for their country of origin, and their 'alien registration number'. 'We were contacted by educators and their leadership from Española that Española Valley High School was asking teachers to collect immigration data,' Parr-Sánchez explained. According to Parr-Sánchez, a former teacher with 25 years of experience, and someone who's administered standardized tests, these types of questions raised concerns. As the current president of the NEA-NM, a local teachers' union, she's taken steps to figure out who sent the directive, and why, by filing a complaint with the state. The district has until June 2nd to formally respond. 'They were terrified to be asked to give private information about their students,' Parr-Sanchez said about the teachers who brought the incident to her attention. The union argues the incident goes against a bargain reached by the district and teachers' union, arguing the directive is out of educators' agreed-upon 'work conditions.' They also believe it violates FERPA, a federal law that protects student privacy. 'Our mission is to educate every child that comes to our schools regardless of their race, ethnicity, country of origin,' Parr-Sánchez added. Española Public Schools said they've started an investigation into the concerns and will take appropriate action if any violations are found. It's unclear who, or why the directive was sent out. The district sid they are unable to comment further, as the investigation takes place. NEA-NM provided KRQE News 13 with a quote from the ACT testing group, that states 'ACT does not ask for, or collect information about examinees immigration status… this is not a requirement for taking our exams and is not information we collect or use in any way.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Yahoo
Coach's TikTok inspired drill leaves Texas students burned after crawling on hot track
TYLER COUNTY, Texas (KETK) — Several middle school students in Texas sustained first and second-degree burns after their coach told them to 'bear crawl' across a blistering hot track, leaving parents outraged and demanding answers. According to multiple parents from Woodville ISD who spoke with KETK News, the incident occurred on Monday during a 7th-period class led by Coach Kobe Adams. Students were reportedly given a choice between running the track or participating in a TikTok trend. 2-year-old tests positive for THC at Lufkin hospital, affidavit says Parents say the class chose the trend without knowing they would perform a one-hundred-yard bear crawl on a hot track surface. If they fell or their knees touched the ground, they would have to start over. As temperatures soared, students began complaining of intense pain in their hands. According to parents, some students reportedly resorted to spitting on their palms in an attempt to cool the burns. Parents say their children voiced their discomfort during the drill, but the activity continued. Coach Adams allegedly informed some parents before school dismissal that a few students had sustained minor injuries during the exercise. However, when parents arrived to pick up their children, many were shocked to find severe blisters, missing skin and visible signs of burn injuries. Several students were later taken to the hospital, where parents say they were diagnosed with first- and second-degree burns. Some families said they were contacted by school officials regarding the incident, but many are still seeking answers and accountability for what they describe as a preventable and negligent act. AFFIDAVIT: Parent arrested for giving vodka-laced Jell-O shots to kids at Tyler elementary Christmas party On Tuesday, the district released a statement addressing the incident: Woodville ISD is aware of the incident that occurred during a pre-athletics class at Woodville Middle School on Monday, May 19. We are equally as concerned with the reports as the community and are taking the matter seriously, as our students' well-being and safety is a top priority. The Superintendent and Campus Principal have launched a full internal review and are cooperating with local law enforcement. Currently, we are aware that students participated in an exercise program promoted on social media that involves bear crawling on the track. Due to the temperature of the track, the exercise resulted in some students reporting injuries. While federal privacy laws (FERPA) limit what we can share, we want to be clear: the employee actions described by the media do not reflect the values or expectations of Woodville ISD. The District is addressing all personnel matters in line with district policy, and can confirm the staff member involved has been removed from campus and will not be returning to the District. District and campus leadership are in direct contact with affected families and remain committed to transparency, accountability, and ensuring a safe, respectful environment for all students. Parents have addressed public comments on why students didn't stop the drill when they were in pain: 'This is an athletic coach and children are taught to listen to him and he's taught to train them and push them to become athletes. So people are saying the kids should've had common sense. No, they're doing what their coach is directing them to do because their coach is supposed to push them to do better. They didn't know their hands were being burned,' a parent told KETK News. KETK has reached out to the Woodville Police Department and the school district, but has not heard back. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Yahoo
School principal charged for sex crimes involving students
ST. LOUIS COUNTY, Mo. – A former principal at a St. Louis County middle school is being held on a $1 million cash-only bond for numerous sex crimes involving students. According to the St. Louis County Police Department's probable cause statement, Cedric Gerald, 48, was working as the principal at Westview Middle School since 2023. Four victims, all of them students, told police Gerald had inappropriate contact or engaged in appropriate behavior with them. The victims had inappropriate FaceTime, text messages, and video calls with Gerald in exchange for payment, police said. Gerald also engaged in appropriate sex acts with the students on school grounds. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Gerald was placed on administrative leave during the investigation and never returned to the school. During an interview with detectives, police said Gerald admitted to several of the crimes. The St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's Office charged Gerald with second-degree sexual trafficking of a child under 18 years of age, sexual exploitation of a minor, possession of child pornography, attempted statutory sodomy – person less than 14 years of age, sexual misconduct involving a child under 15, first-degree harassment, sexual contact with a student, and two counts of second-degree statutory sodomy. Online records do not show when Gerald will appear in court. The county police and prosecuting attorney's office will hold a joint news conference Thursday afternoon to discuss the investigation. The school district is cooperating with the investigation. Detectives with county's Bureau of Crimes Against Persons Unit suspect there may be additional victims. Anyone with information is asked to contact the St. Louis County Police Department at 314-615-5400. After the announcement of charges, the Riverview Garden School District issued the following statement: On May 14, 2025, the District received notice that Dr. Cedric Gerald was charged with committing serious offenses, at least some of which involve District students. Dr. Gerald is currently in the custody of law enforcement authorities and has resigned from his position with the District. When the District became aware of the initial allegations, the District promptly notified Children's Division and law enforcement. Dr. Gerald was placed on administrative leave and never returned to District property. The District has actively been working with Children's Division and law enforcement regarding the incident. The District wants to acknowledge the bravery of our students and staff members who came forward with information regarding this matter. Given the sensitive nature of this situation, we cannot comment in detail about the allegations as personally identifiable student information is confidential under the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act ('FERPA') and District policy. Our Board of Education's policies set forth high standards of expected staff conduct. All employees also participate in annual training regarding appropriate conduct towards students, including recognizing and maintaining professional boundaries. The District conducts thorough background checks on all new employees, which includes a Missouri Highway Patrol and FBI criminal background check. Pursuant to the restrictions placed on the District when receiving criminal background checks, we cannot release information regarding any particular background check received. The District is also enrolled in the Missouri Rap Back program operated by the Missouri Highway Patrol, which provides automatic notifications to the District if an employee is arrested for a criminal offense in Missouri. At all times, our District's top and most important priority is to provide the best education possible for our students in a safe and secure environment. Our District is acting, and will continue to act, in accordance with its policies to address this matter and to maintain the safe educational environment that our community expects. We appreciate the patience of our school community as we move through this difficult situation. To the extent District families or students need additional support during this time, the District is providing access to additional counselors and social workers on site at Westview Middle School through the remainder of the school year. Finally, should any members of our community have specific concerns about Dr. Gerald's conduct with their children, they should contact the Superintendent at 314-869-2505, Tammy Vega from Children's Division at 314-605-0618, or Detective Belcher of the St. Louis County Police Department at 314-615-5400. Riverview Garden School District Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Chicago Tribune
14-05-2025
- Chicago Tribune
Longtime Munster middle school counselor denies violating student confidentiality laws
The School Town of Munster fired a long-time middle school counselor accused of violating student confidentiality laws Monday night. The School Board of Trustees voted 3-1 – with Board President Kyle Dempsey absent – to not renew the contract of Julie Atkinson during its Monday night meeting. Atkinson had been a counselor with Wilbur Wright Middle School for 17 years. Addressing the board and the audience before the vote, Atkinson, who was placed on leave from her position January 10, said the basis of her firing was that she'd consulted with a licensed social worker about a report conducted on a student in crisis. The child's mom, she told the Post-Tribune, was aware of their actions and didn't have a problem with them since they'd been working with them since early in the school year. She's also 'extremely familiar' with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which protects students' educational records and personally identifiable information. People who have access to this information either have a legitimate educational interest – which Atkinson said the social worker had by virtue of them working with the child – or a parent's permission to see it, which she said they had. 'As a licensed school counselor, I'm extremely aware of my ethical obligations as they relate to confidentiality and FERPA – which are two separate things – because those are the literal basis of my profession,' Atkinson said. 'If students or parents don't trust me, they won't talk to me, so to suggest that I have violated a student's right to privacy is perhaps the most offensive thing I could be accused of doing.' Atkinson pointed out, however, that the administrator who initiated the action against her, Principal Bojan Jovanovic, 'wasn't able to answer the questions, 'What is FERPA?' 'What does FERPA mean?' and 'What provision of FERPA did she violate?'' during a hearing on the matter with the School Board and her. She also said the mother of the child in question said she's never to this day heard from anyone in the administration about the incident, which took place in November. 'The psychological and physical effects I have experienced during this forced social isolation have been profound because my coworkers were allowed to just think I was ill,' she said. 'At one point, (Jovanovic) encouraged the staff to send me a 'Thinking of You' card as if admin also didn't know why I wasn't at work and wanted to support me.' Atkinson said she was given the opportunity to resign 'many times' but didn't because she didn't violate any policies or laws, and she wanted her children to see the importance of standing up for what's right 'even when you know you're not going to win.' 'If I can be fired for this – despite having enthusiastic parental support – then I would urge the other counselors and social workers in the district to take notice,' Atkinson said. 'If I can be fired after 17 years of being consistently rated as 'highly effective,' then any employee in this district can be fired at any time.' Outgoing STM Superintendent Bret Heller declined comment by email Tuesday. Scores of parents posted messages supporting Atkinson on a social media post her husband, Ben Atkinson, made asking whether Atkinson would be able to speak at the meeting. Heather Burmester, who was present, said Atkinson played a crucial role in one of her son's acclimations to school when they moved to town. 'It's not just, 'Oh, she's a good counselor.' The experience people have with Mrs. Atkinson, the experience that our students of color have reported with her is above, above average. She's irreplaceable,' Burmester said. 'If there was an issue, there has to be some other recourse so this board could say 'No' to certifying her termination. 'We cannot lose her, especially on the heels of the Elliott fiasco, where we lost six good people.' Board members John Castro, Amy Sinder and Ingrid Schwarz Wolf voted to terminate Atkinson, while Board Vice President Kristen Smith voted against it. Debora Porter, UniServ Director for Area 1 of the Indiana State Teachers Association, said she and their staff fought as hard as they could, but there was an imbalance of power they couldn't overcome. 'We felt we were on the just side, but they had all the power, and under Indiana law, we've gone as far as we can go,' Porter said. 'You would think that the way public education is under attack in this state, we would cling to each other, but it seems the stress is getting to everybody.'
CNN
10-05-2025
- CNN
Protecting student privacy, or hiding key details from the public? How schools use or misuse a 50-year-old law you might not know about
Student lifeFacebookTweetLink Follow A young boy suffered a serious head injury on the playground, but his family can't get surveillance video to learn what happened. The school said releasing that footage would violate student privacy. A governor ordered schools to notify parents if there's a fentanyl overdose at their child's school. But schools resisted the order, citing an often misunderstood law. Across the country, K-12 schools and universities have denied information to the public – even to parents of injured students – citing student privacy or FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. But many schools have misinterpreted the federal law, said CNN Senior Counsel Frank LoMonte, who previously served as executive director of the Student Press Law Center in Washington, DC. He is also a former director of the Brechner Center for Freedom of Information at the University of Florida. 'There's no question that FERPA was a well-intentioned law that has gone completely off the rails and is now really more of a detriment to the quality of education than an asset,' he said. The law prevents schools from publicizing specific, sensitive student records. But it doesn't have any consequences for schools that refuse to give information that should be available to the public. We asked LoMonte how some schools use FERPA as an excuse to withhold too much information – potentially impacting public safety – and what can be done to fix the problem. (This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.) LoMonte: Congress passed it in 1974 as a very narrow privacy statute inspired by a specific concern. Back in the 1970s, a lot of K-12 schools were starting to hire psychologists and therapists on their staffs, and they were bringing in students and administering behavioral tests that then went into the students' permanent files in the principal's office. Congress intended the law to be used to protect students in unusual, extreme outlier situations when schools violate or refuse to adopt a confidentiality policy. Congress was concerned that a student might get profiled as being a dangerous or unstable person without their parents knowing and in a way that might blow back on them later in life. So, Congress passed a law that has both 'rights' and 'privacy' in the name. The 'rights' part says that if a school keeps an education record about a particular student, then the parent or the adult-age student has a right to inspect that record, to correct mistakes in that record, to demand a hearing if the school refuses to correct the record. The Supreme Court has been very clear that FERPA privacy is narrow, and it applies to only a small subset of the records that schools and colleges keep – certainly not to every email or text message or snippet of video in which a student is identifiable. In a 2009 case, the Supreme Court said FERPA is only about the records that are permanently stored in the principal's office or the dean's office and a file that corresponds to a student's name. One thing that the Department of Education has said over and over again is that FERPA is a records statute, not an information statute. In other words, all it protects is the documents. It doesn't protect the information. If a journalist or a parent were to ask an educator about a student, the educator is completely free under FERPA to share personal experiences and observations. The only way you can trigger the federal law is by reading someone the contents of the file in the principal's office. Any school or college that takes federal money has to maintain a policy of keeping student education records confidential. If a school does not maintain a confidentiality policy, then the Department of Education can completely disqualify them from receiving any federal money. Essentially, it's the financial death penalty. But it's not a one-strike-and-you're-dead law. There are all kinds of warnings. In over 50 years, the Department of Education has never once taken a dime away from any educational institution. There have been many cases where schools have refused to explain to families anything about the circumstances of a violent or threatening incident, because they claim that even discussing the circumstances would violate student privacy. When someone brings a gun to school, parents want to know: What were the circumstances of finding this gun? What type of penalty did the student get? And all of that is shrouded … even though there is compelling interest in knowing whether discipline is being fairly and adequately imposed. I think there are two parallel problems going on. First of all, people have received bad training, and they are legitimately confused and misinformed. So it's safest to just give no answer at all. Also, I'm certain there is intentional misapplication of the law. Because just like any other government agencies, schools and colleges are very concerned about their reputations. And they reflexively resist oversight and transparency. The reality today is that if you are a parent and your child comes home with a bloody nose from a beating on the school bus, you are entitled to zero information from a school (misinterpreting FERPA). You cannot get a copy of the surveillance video that shows the beating on the school bus. You cannot find out who attacked your child. You cannot even find out what discipline the attackers did or did not receive, even without their names attached. For example, a family in Arkansas rushed their child to the doctor after he suffered a serious head injury on the school playground. The doctor's office asked if they knew how the injury occurred, and the family attorney asked the school for surveillance video. The video would have helped the doctors diagnose and treat the injury. But the school insisted that because other children were visible in the video, it was a confidential FERPA record. That's the kind of insanity that can result. Unfortunately, the only way to make an educational institution turn over information is by suing for public records. That's incredibly costly and time-consuming. And it doesn't work at a purely private institution because those institutions aren't covered by FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) laws. And as soon as a case goes to court, the educational institution will immediately argue that they are forbidden by federal privacy law from answering the question. And judges should skeptically examine those claims and see through them. But unfortunately, that's rare. Judges tend to be highly deferential to the privacy claims raised by these educational institutions. Imagine that any school lawyer comes to court and says, 'Judge, if we honor this request for records, the US Department of Education will take away all our money and close us down.' No judge wants that blood on their hands, right? I think that is where the undue degree of deference comes from. No. What the law says is if you violate FERPA, you get a nasty letter from the Department of Education saying, 'please assure us that you obey a policy of confidentiality.' That is the only thing that happens to you. Only if you refuse to write the letter to the department can you be penalized any further. And that's never happened. So the boogeyman of financial shutdown is greatly exaggerated and would certainly never be imposed in the event of granting a single request for public records. There are certainly cases where giving out confidential information about a small number of identifiers will trace back to those students. No question. If we suspend the starting five players on the basketball team for steroids, everybody can figure out who those five starters are. It is easy to match the names with the penalty. But just the fact that a small number of people are involved doesn't necessarily make the statistic matchable to individuals. The more important point is FERPA is about protecting the reputation of people against being damaged by information in school records that might be inaccurate or unfair. Under normal principles of privacy law, information ceases to be private once it is widely known by the public. So if it is widely known that Billy brought a gun to school and was arrested and jailed, then nothing about Billy bringing that gun to school is private anymore. But the way that schools and judges have interpreted (FERPA) … schools will still look you straight in the eye and say, 'We cannot tell you anything about what Billy did or what punishment he got.' In the law of privacy, there is always a sliding scale of privacy depending on the age of the person involved and how compelling the public's need is for information. I think you could still argue that even with a juvenile suspect, if the crime is very serious, and if the school ignored a lot of warning signs that put the student body in danger, the public has a compelling need to know that. If somebody received a slap on the wrist for past threats or weapons incidents, then there are valid questions about how school authorities did their jobs. That is not information about the child. The public is much more interested in whether the administrators at that school can be trusted to keep the school safe. This is another defect with the law. Congress did not include any (consequence) for over-concealing information. It's a door that only swings one way. You could be penalized for under-protecting privacy, but you cannot be penalized for overprotecting privacy. So a person who is denied access to records cannot file a FERPA complaint and obtain federal recourse, except for the parent. That is the only person who can file a complaint. A journalist or a concerned member of the community cannot. But the hypocrisy of schools is that when a journalist or a community member needs public records, FERPA is interpreted to encompass anything and everything. When a journalist shows up and needs surveillance videos, all of a sudden, they magically transform into confidential FERPA records. But when a parent shows up or a student shows up and asks to see their own records, all of a sudden, the definition of a FERPA record shrinks. And the law definitely does not provide two different definitions. The law says you have to call one strike zone. But schools and colleges are not prepared to live by that definition. Nobody wants to be known as a college where lots of crime happens or lots of hazing happens. So it's in their own reputational self-interest to interpret as much information as possible as being confidential under federal law. And if you tell the public, 'My hands are tied by federal law. I would love to help you and cooperate, but Congress forbids me from doing so,' that is a get-out-of-accountability-free card. There are a small handful of primarily religious schools that refuse, on principle, to take any federal money at all. But outside of that very small handful, even otherwise private schools regularly take federal money, like Pell Grants. At the college level, it's very common to accept Pell Grants or to accept federal research grants, even if your institution is otherwise private and not government-funded. Special education is a program that receives quite a bit of federal subsidies, as well as school lunches. Those are two major sources of federal money flowing to schools – even ones that otherwise consider themselves to be private. It's very common today to ask a college how many of its students received a notice from the federal government that their immigration status was being changed, and for the college to refuse to give out the number – not the names, just the number. Numerous universities have said that they regard the number of people who have been notified that they're subject to deportation as being a piece of confidential information. There is this perception that numbers are confidential records, and there's no support for that. Whether colleges are doing an adequate job of disciplining people who commit serious crimes on their campus is a matter of compelling, overriding public interest. If you are accused of being a rapist anywhere other than on a college campus, a public record is created – starting with arrest, through prosecution, through appeal. All those things create a records trail – except on a college campus. Many colleges interpret privacy law as forbidding them from saying anything about the outcomes of those cases – even if they conclude that somebody engaged in a violent crime. Hazing is an example. If you beat someone with a paddle in a private apartment complex, you are going to jail. Your police record is going to be open for public inspection. But if you beat someone with a paddle on a college campus, there is every chance that the public will never know about it. And that seems like it's a two-tiered system of justice. Certainly there are more compelling privacy arguments when you're dealing with very young children. Depending on the age of the child, it really might make sense to disclose a narrower range of information when the person with the weapon is 10 years old. In the eyes of the law, that person is a juvenile, incapable of forming criminal intent. But even with the 10-year-old, the public is certainly entitled to know whether discipline was given out in an adequate and fair way. One of the many concerns about the secrecy of discipline is that discipline can be administered in a discriminatory manner when it is secretive. While there's no compelling interest in having the names of children who get suspended from school, there is certainly a compelling interest in knowing their demographics. We need to know whether discipline is handed out fairly or with favoritism. And the lack of transparency around discipline makes it very hard to evaluate the effectiveness of that system. They absolutely can answer that. And they should answer that, because there is a public interest in knowing whether school health and safety protocols are adequate. It is hard to ever make an argument that grades or medical tests or psychological tests need to be disclosed. But once something rises to the level of potentially criminal conduct – and conduct that affects the safety of other people – then at the very least, the public is entitled to know the circumstances, if not the names. You're raising two great questions. The first is the public is absolutely entitled to know numbers and statistics. Did the school have one child collapse from heat exhaustion, or 10 children? If one child collapsed, that's not indicative of a systemic problem. If 10 children collapse, that is a red flag that the coaches may be disregarding safety, and that goes to the performance of the employees, not to the students. But many schools will refuse to give out that number, erroneously claiming student privacy. So that's a great example of times when we suffer through privacy for privacy's sake … even though none of the purposes of FERPA are being achieved. If you're getting information from the school, what the Supreme Court has said is that FERPA applies only to the content of education records. That is all that it applies to. So if you ask the coach if Johnny is doing OK after collapsing on the field, the only way the coach can violate FERPA is by reading Johnny's FERPA records to you. If the coach knows from personal observation what happened to Johnny, he can tell you that without triggering FERPA at all. No, because the coach is not a provider of health services. HIPAA only applies to people who provide medical services or to insurers. Take the financial death penalty off the table. If the penalty for violating FERPA was a sensibly proportionate penalty, then it would not be the boogeyman that it is today. And the door should swing both ways. If a journalist or a concerned citizen gets a frivolous FERPA argument (from a school), then that journalist or that citizen should be able to file a complaint with the Department of Education and get redress. In all 50 states, education is one of the top three government expenditures. Whether schools and colleges are using their authority properly is a matter of public concern because they are huge, powerful, well-funded government agencies. The problems that occur inside schools and colleges do not stay there. If a kid is a violent kid, and the kid is being let off with multiple warnings and minimal disciplinary consequences after giving every indication of being violent and dangerous, that violence and that danger may not stay inside of the building. So it's in everybody's interest to know whether schools and colleges are doing their jobs properly.
