Educational Privacy Act

Education Act 1996 places a legal duty on the parent or guardian of a child aged five to sixteen years (known as compulsory school age), to ensure that their children or child attends and receives full-time education, either in a traditional school or any other means that is appropriate for their age, ability, and aptitude, taking into account any special needs they may have. The Act makes it a criminal offense for a parent or guardian to take their child out of school without authorisation from the school, and an offense for parents who are aware that their child is failing to attend school to not take reasonable action to ensure that the child attends. The offense of failing to ensure regular attendance at school is punishable by up to three months’ imprisonment and/or fine up to one thousand pounds.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), brain child of President Johnson, was passed in 1965. ESEA was intended to mitigate disparities in access to quality academic services and learning outcomes endured by underprivileged and minority students by federally funding schools serving their communities. ESEA, later revised as No Child Left Behind, was to be one element in a larger reform agenda focused on urban redevelopment, vocational training and “EDUCATION AND HEALTH” (Thomas & Brady, 2005). In his 1965 State of the Union, Johnson proclaimed, “No longer will we tolerate widespread involuntary idleness, unnecessary human hardship and misery, the impoverishment of whole areas… ” Nevertheless, this intractable problem remains, as illustrated by recent National Assessment of Educational Progress findings:

The education system is deeply flawed. It does not fight social injustice, but rather exacerbates the issue. The majority of people in the U.S are blind to the fact that there are still inequities within the education system, much less everyday life. A system based on standardized test scores inadvertently oppresses poor people. The Governments ' decision to judge a schools ' success by its test scores evidently created a faucet of running water for systematic oppression. The flowing water of oppression floods poor schools; drowning students with dreams, and giving no mercy. The only ones safe from the water are the privileged, who are oblivious to the fact that it exists.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) protects student records, so they are confidential to the parent’s knowledge. FERPA is where when a student turns 18, all of the rights under FERPA pass over from the parent to the child. The parents will never know how their child is doing, other than what the children tell them. Young adults should be more responsible and take school seriously when they are in college.

Privacy was once taken for granted in public education, but now through the 1974 law, Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act it is pushed to the forefront of the minds of every educator in the United States (Cossler, 2010). This law has paved the way for many lawsuits regarding privacy of student’s records, which have left teachers scared, undereducated and unaware of certain regulations of the law. FERPA laws provide protections for students, but also allow access of all student records to the student’s custodial parents, which in some situations has cause problems and in some cases have specifically brought clarifications of the law. Has the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act provided the much needed privacy for students

“This Act was introduced in January 2005 to promote transparency and accountability in the public sector.” Anyone may make a written request for information being held by a school. The schools have a duty to provide assistance. Some information may be protected due to confidentiality. Schools need to follow the guidance provided by the DCSF when handling requests for information.

Family educational rights and privacy act was enforced in the year 1974.This act is under U.S compliance laws.

Passed in 1974, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act is an unwieldy piece of

The Fourth Amendment defends people from being neglected by an authoritative and controlling government. Conflicting to popular belief, the right to privacy is not specifically mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. Over the years, the courts have translated the Fourth Amendment, along with other Amendments such as the ninth, to protect privacy in many situations. In question, is there a limitation for those rights to be exercised at school? Is a student protected from unreasonable searches and seizures at school? New Jersey v. T.L.O., (1985), a case where a 14-year old girl female student caught smoking in the bathroom at school was searched at school, and the evidence collected was used by the state in her delinquency trial in juvenile court.

The USAPA provides agencies the ability to ask for student records in concurrence with a terrorism investigation. This was previously protected by Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. These agencies must, however, receive a court order from a Federal District court. The United States Immigration and Naturalization Service is given quite extensive powers concerning foreign students. The school is required to keep visa information on these students and update any changes to these visas. Science programs have much more requirements than other areas. Scientists must have thorough background checks before they can obtain materials from the newly-expanded toxin list that the government keeps. Also, convicted felons, people dishonorably discharged from the military, illegal aliens, and people convicted of using illicit drugs are not allowed to use these documented materials.

This whole process has been put in place to keep citizens from having their privacy violated, but since its creation, the fourth amendment has been altered. One of the alterations deals with the reduction of public schools students’ Fourth Amendment rights while on public school campuses. This reduction has been put in place for the safety of students and school staff. Because schools are meant to be a safe place for children, school administrators are given the authority to search any student who is suspected of violating school rules with less evidence required than that of a police officer to complete a search or seizure. The administrator only requires reasonable suspicion to search a student. Reasonable suspicion requires some facts but less hard evidence than probable cause.

Of the four documents discussed, FERPA is one that is more of a personal preference rather than a necessity. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 was designed to protect the privacy of educational records, establish the rights of students to inspect and review their educational records, and it also provides control over the release of educational record information.

While there are several legal reasons to maintain the privacy of students, there are also many ethical ones, such as not wanting to expose students to embarrassing disclosures or discrimination. For example, teachers at High School One have access to student data concerning health issues. I have had student who experience seizures, who have diabetes, and rare allergies. While

“This legislation grew out of the fact that by 1998 roughly ten million American children had access to the Internet, and at the same time, studies indicated that children were unable to understand the potential effect of revealing their personal information online and parent failed to monitor their children’s use of the Internet.” (Koby)

“Parents or eligible students have the right to inspect and review the student's education records maintained by the school.” (U.S. Department of Education) Because of FERPA, The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, parents are able to monitor their student/children progress in school. If a student were to lie about a grade, the parents have several ways to find out if they were lying. First of all, for Alvarado, we have Skyward, a way for parents and students to check grades, and with FERPA, they can also get the records themselves. “Protecting Children’s Privacy Online – The law sets out specific guidelines about the online collection of personal information from children under 13.” (The U.S. Small Business Administration) With more creepers and people looking for an easy target, it’s so easy for them to get your information. With this law protecting thirteen year olds and younger, it’s harder for them to get to them. My opinion though, is that they should raise the age, teenagers are still young, and they can do some reckless things either over the web, or in real life. The government is starting to take action in protecting us, but we need to learn to accept it. Yes, change is difficult to get use to or agree with, but change is good. “Health Information Privacy, the Office