Did Bradley violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act?

From my research, it appears that Bradley did not violate Alicia Butler’s privacy by disclosing that she did not receive any degrees at the school. However, Butler is doing the right thing by getting a lawyer anyway. A lawyer will make sure all of Bradley’s t’s were crossed and their i’s dotted.

The U.S. Department of Education has some pretty strict privacy policies on school records. According to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA):

A school MAY disclose education records without consent when:

  • The disclosure is to school officials who have been determined to have legitimate educational interests as set forth in the institution’s annual notification of rights to students;
  • The student is seeking or intending to enroll in another school;
  • The disclosure is to state or local educational authorities auditing or enforcing Federal or State supported education programs or enforcing Federal laws which relate to those programs;
  • The disclosure is to the parents of a student who is a dependent for income tax purposes;
  • The disclosure is in connection with determining eligibility, amounts, and terms for financial aid or enforcing the terms and conditions of financial aid;
  • The disclosure is pursuant to a lawfully issued court order or subpoena; or
  • The information disclosed has been appropriately designated as directory information by the school.

The only possible category under which Bradley could have disclosed info about Alicia Butler to the press is the last bullet point, “directory information.” What is that? The FERPA FAQ answers that (emphasis mine):

FERPA defines “directory information” as information contained in the education records of a student that would not generally be considered harmful or an invasion of privacy if disclosed. Typically, “directory information” includes information such as name, address, telephone listing, date and place of birth, participation in officially recognized activities and sports, and dates of attendance. A school may disclose “directory information” to third parties without consent if it has given public notice of the types of information which it has designated as “directory information,” the parent’s or eligible student’s right to restrict the disclosure of such information, and the period of time within which a parent or eligible student has to notify the school in writing that he or she does not want any or all of those types of information designated as “directory information.” The means of notification could include publication in various sources, including a newsletter, in a local newspaper, or in the student handbook. The school could also include the “directory information” notification as part of the general notification of rights under FERPA. The school does not have to notify a parent or eligible student individually. (34 CFR § 99.37.)

So, Bradley gets to choose what information will be designated “directory information.” And they have. According to Bradley’s website, they consider the following information “directory information,” and thus, able to be disseminated without the consent of the student (emphasis mine):

  • Name and address, including telephone listing, local, permanent, and e-mail.
  • Parent name and address, (for news releases only).
  • Major field of study.
  • Dates of attendence.
  • Class and full-time/part-time status.
  • Approved candidacy for graduation.
  • Degrees and awards received.
  • Most recent institution attended by student.
  • Participation in officially recognized activities and sports.
  • Weight and height of athletic team members.
  • Birthdate will be validated only when furnished by the person making inquiry, for positive identification of the student.

Students can sign a “Stop of Release” form to prevent this information from being disclosed without their consent, but according to the Journal Star, Butler did not sign one.

3 thoughts on “Did Bradley violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act?”

  1. Did your research include some of the more recent amendments to the privacy act that narrowed the scope of information that schools may release?

  2. It was based on the Department of Education’s website, which says it was last updated 2/17/05. I cannot find online any germane amendments since then. If you know of any, please let me know!

  3. FERPA is a screaming lunacy of a law, and to be honest, school officials, parents, and everybody else reflexively say “FERPA” when poked, regardless of whether it applies or not, like a chorus of frogs ribbiting “FERPA. FERPA. FERPA.”

    Under FERPA it’s illegal to do such things as have student mailboxes where graded work is handed back or have students grade one another’s homework as a learning tool. But all kinds of things people would like to THINK are private — pictures, directory information, etc. — are not.

    We dealt with FERPA constantly when I interned at the SPLC and it accomplishes basically nothing it’s set out to accomplish while simultaneously making teachers wade through red tape to engage in traditional forms of grading and teaching. And a lot of what we saw was schools ignoring FERPA w/r/t STUDENT rights, but as soon as the school OFFICIALS had any of their policies or activities questioned, suddenly they couldn’t release any public records because of FERPA.

    (Also, virtually every school makes press releases upon graduation listing all students and degrees received, and virtually every school maintains commencement programs with the same list in their libraries. Both are open to public access. It would be hard to claim degrees awarded were protected by FERPA unless the student went to great trouble at the time to ensure no mention of their degree entered any public arena, presumably because of domestic violence or stalking concerns.)

Comments are closed.