First Day Packets and FERPA

Are the FERPA forms in the first day packets different from how they were last year?

Given the knowledge that private information about students and families were inappropriately - if not illegally - shared with a commercial enterprise, the District may have altered the FERPA form.

Given the knowledge that private information about students and families were inappropriately - if not illegally - shared with a commercial enterprise, are you regarding the FERPA form more closely?

Comments

StepJ said…
Yes -- definately read more carefully.

As it reads I think they can give information out to pretty much anyone as they included "consultants" and other very generic terms for professions.

I will still say 'no' but don't know what difference it will make.

I said 'no' last year and we have been contacted multiple times for surveys by groups other than the District.
9/9/10, 7:03 PM
ebaer said…
Could you be a little more specific about the violations of FERPA? Thanks.
9/9/10, 7:05 PM
Sarah said…
Yes, permission slips looked similar. However, I was given an additional form (only from the middle school..not elementary school) for families that selected the No Release Option (B). The No Release Option form had several areas ( Media Release, Yearbook Release, All school family directory and Website) with options to check yes or no. By my signiture, I specifically wrote in that information was for family directory ONLY.
9/9/10, 7:31 PM
Maureen said…
I'm thinking that I'm going to copy my FERPA forms this year before I turn them in just in case I need to prove that I signed them.
9/9/10, 8:01 PM
Melissa Westbrook said…
Maureen, that's exactly what I did for years because I wanted to be able to say, "Yes, I do know what I signed because I have a copy of it."
9/9/10, 10:43 PM
suep. said…
Anonymous ebaer said...

Could you be a little more specific about the violations of FERPA? Thanks.

9/9/10 7:05 PM

Please see my write-up about this at: Should the School District Be Allowed to Give Our Kids’ Phone numbers, Addresses and Photos to Every Tom, Dick and Pollster?"

-- sue peters
9/9/10, 11:35 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Read more

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors

 Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting.  In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance.  - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Read more