New student privacy rules proposed
Related: View Proposal
The projected alterations come from problems identified by external investigations into the events of April 16.
In June 2007, federal officials released a document titled "Report to the President on Issues Raised by the Virginia Tech Tragedy." The article outlines the issue of colleges, specifically Tech, not relaying pertinent information out of a fear of violating privacy laws. In addition to the federal report, a panel appointed by Gov. Tim Kaine found that the outdated privacy limitations were related to the alleged communication breakdowns at Tech on April 16.
The Education Department's proposal would provide immunity for school administrators who release private information, as long as the given information is directly related to the health and safety of society.
Jim Bradshaw, Department of Education spokesman, said that the proposal is a result of a high demand from the nation's schools for clarity.
"This is an effort to make crystal clear to schools that they may release records of students who are considered to be a danger to themselves or others," Bradshaw said. "This comes after we had gotten feedback from institutions across the country expressing doubt over whether they could release these records."
The proposed regulations also allow for a student's parents to be informed without the student's consent in an emergency situation. Previously, professors and administrators have been limited to the information they can disclose, unable to alert parents and appropriate officials without breaching FERPA.
Originally passed in 1974, FERPA was established to ensure student privacy. However, according to Tod Massa, director of policy research and data warehousing with the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia, the interpretation was falsely viewed that no one could talk to students unless they had a legitimate right to do so.
"The intent was to protect students from meddling by FBI, politicians and people who had no business doing so," Massa said.
Bradshaw said that the proposal will follow a standard protocol for the passing of regulations. Every time Congress passes a bill into law, the agency that enforces those laws must publish how it will be regulated. In this case, the proposed regulations are tied directly into the FERPA law in effect.
Massa said that though much of the proposal is linked to Tech, there is also a portion of clarifications that are unrelated.
"They are about the proper venues for doing program review at institutions, further projections on student data in regards to identity theft, and in response to some interesting lawsuits," Massa said. "Apparently a law student tried to sue an institution for using his given name. He believed that FERPA protected his anonymity in his class of peers. A bit of a stretch."
FERPA could also see technological updates. The proposal covers the discharge of education records of students enrolled in online classes, a clarification that has never been before been distinguished.
Additionally, the privacy proposal lets universities release student information to the companies that they outsource work to.
Though the proposal does not change the rules on parents accessing their students' grades, it does elucidate the current policy. Universities will continue to have the authority to give parents whose students are claimed as dependents on their tax returns admission to their records.
While parents may still prohibit schools from releasing information about their children who are minors, the law enables colleges to divulge students
"directory information." This includes names, addresses, birthdates, and the height and weight of members of athletic teams, among other things.
The proposed regulations allow for a further step in the verification process of recommendation letters and other records.
For example, colleges can now return recommendation documents back to the alleged author, who in turn can either validate or reject the letter as a falsification.
Also, institutions would be able to share records with the group that originally created them without the consent of a student or parent, something that helps universities who would otherwise be unable to gauge authenticity.
Deciding whether or not students are a threat to themselves or one another will be left up to the university, Bradshaw said.
"We provide flexibility to schools to determine if the student is a threat to himself or others," Bradshaw said.
Kirsten Nelson, communications director with the State Council for Higher Education in Virginia, said that in addition to having the ability to self-identify the legitimacy behind releasing records, colleges will continue to have a staff member conscious of FERPA's regulations.
"Each institution has people whose job includes keeping up with FERPA," Nelson said. "When the new regulations become official, they will have to adopt them and abide by them." Massa noted that the most significant factor in the proposal could be the removal of fear of penalization for universities releasing student information in the event of an emergency.
"The safe harbor provision, from a student health and safety perspective, is the most significant," Massa said. "That is where the department will not substitute its judgment for that of the institution."
The Department of Education has encouraged citizens to comment on their proposed amendments to FERPA before May 8, 2008. Comments and recommendations should be submitted to the Education Department.
Upon the deadline for comments to be submitted, the Department of Education will spend the remainder of the spring and summer reviewing suggestions. Bradshaw said that the final results will be published in the fall.
The results, much like the proposal, will be published in the Federal Register, referred to as the government's bulletin board, a publication for notices of federal regulations.
"The comments are supposed to be suggestions on what to change in the proposed regulation, so we decide what changes need to be made before they are published," Bradshaw said.
