The Piedmont Highlander

The Student News Site of Piedmont High School

The Piedmont Highlander

The Piedmont Highlander

Judge revises protocol for release of California student data

A federal court judge modified the procedure for the disclosure of confidential information regarding California public school students on March 1. The data is being shared as part of a lawsuit concerning the state’s management of special education.

The lawsuit, called Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Association, et al. v. California Department of Education (CDE), alleges that the CDE has failed to monitor and enforce school district adherence in providing a free and appropriate public education to students with special needs.

“We suspect that the California Department of Education is not requiring its school districts to be in compliance with special education,” said Vice President of the California Concerned Parents Christine English.

CDE information officer Peter Tira said that the CDE “vehemently denies” the allegations.

“We’ve been contesting [the allegations] in court since 2011 and will continue to do so,” Tira said.

As part of the discovery phase of lawsuit, the plaintiffs requested to access data about California students stored on CDE databases dating back to Jan. 1, 2008. The databases include students’ names, social security numbers, demographics, statewide assessment results, behavior and discipline information, Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and health-related records, according to the Jan. 26 notice of disclosure of student records.

When the PUSD administration learned of the court order, they posted an announcement on the district website, sent an email home to all current families and sent a press release to local news sources, superintendent Randall Booker said.

“We wanted to make sure we communicated it out,” Booker said.

Booker said that his main concern is the privacy of children with special needs.

“Parents don’t necessarily want that information to be public, and I can understand why,” Booker said.

The data requested by the plaintiffs is called derivative data, which is a numerical data set reported to the CDE from school districts, English said. The plaintiffs did not request paper copies of student records such as transcripts.

“This case is about requiring the Department of Education to provide oversight and transparency in their monitoring of school districts,” English said. “The only way that we can determine whether or not they are appropriately monitoring is with that derivative data.”

In contrast, Tira said that it is not necessary to release personally identifiable information in this case.

“We [the CDE] oppose the release of any personal student data, and we are fighting vigorously in this lawsuit to protect the privacy of our students and families,” Tira said.

No more than 10 people would be allowed to access the data, English said. The access to data is subject to the May 2014 protective order and the protocol written by the special master, who is an expert appointed by the court to oversee the privacy of the data, according to the March 1 court order.

“The electronic security protocol is an extremely strict, rigid, comprehensive security protocol for electronic information,” English said.

In compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the court issued notice of the disclosure of student records and provided an opportunity for families to object. The objection period was from Feb. 1 to April 1, according to the March 1 court order.

In response to the large number of objections that the court received, U.S. District Court Judge Kimberly Mueller announced a modification to the discovery protocol on March 1. The plaintiffs will no longer receive the data from the CDE database with the most sensitive information called CALPADS. Instead, they will request searches of the data from the CDE. The CDE will maintain custody of the CALPADS data.

In the March 1 order, Mueller also said that the court has not and cannot review the objections individually. In other words, sending an objection form does not constitute opting out of the data disclosure.

However, Tira said that the objections have clearly made a difference because the judge issued the March 1 order that revised the discovery protocol.

“It’s the only formal vehicle that the public has available to register a protest,” Tira said. “We don’t want to give a false sense of security either. It’s not an opt out or an automatic safeguard.”

Booker also said that he had “absolutely, 100 percent, yes” already sent an objection letter for his own children.

Parent Kathleen Winters also sent objections for her two children, citing risks of identity theft and private health information being made public.

“Once something’s out in the public domain, it’s incredibly hard to get that back,” Winters said. “When something is in electronic form, it’s out there forever.”

Director of Special Education Julie Valdez said that student privacy is very important to her and she takes it very seriously.

“It caused me some concern when I learned that this case held the potential to expose confidential student information,” Valdez said.

If a student is publicly identified as having a disability, it may frame people’s perceptions of that individual’s capacity and potential, Valdez said.

“All students have a right to privacy when it comes to their disability status,” Valdez said. “Everyone has their own learning style and strengths and weaknesses and it is theirs to own and theirs to share.”

Junior Peter Wrensen, who considers himself “very fond of keeping privacy” and chooses not to use Facebook for that reason, said that he feels the data release is an invasion of privacy.

“This information is being given up against my will and I have no choice in saying what to do with it,” Wrensen said.

One main privacy concern, the release of social security numbers, is not an issue for PUSD students. PUSD has never uploaded social security numbers to the CDE databases, Booker said. However, a few families did provide social security numbers on a county form for mental health services prior to 2008, Booker said.

For students from districts which did collect social security numbers, English said that her group encourages families to have social security numbers removed from their children’s educational records.

“There are only four things that are required to enroll a child in school: proof of age, proof of residency, proof of parent or guardian and proof of vaccinations,” English said. “You are never required to give your school district your social security number.”

As a parent, Winters said that PUSD has done a great job in making parents aware of the data release.

“I wonder about districts that aren’t as well funded and well managed as ours and what opportunities they’ve had to let parents know,” Winters said. “I can imagine school districts where the parent community has no idea about any of this.”

English said that much of the data that will be transferred to the plaintiffs is already given out in the form of directory information. Under California law, directory information, which includes the students’ names, parents’ names, birthdates, grades and addresses, is already provided by school districts to not-for-profit organizations, unless parents choose to opt out, English said.

“Most parents do not realize that this information is already being given out,” English said. “When you go back to us and our group, we’re really not scary anymore.”

Another issue raised by this case is the laws regarding privacy of student information. In the March 1 court order, Mueller pointed out the “imperfect fit” between the digital age and FERPA legislation, which was written in the 1970s.

“It’s time to revisit what [family educational privacy] looks like with different ways of storing student data and student information,” Valdez said.

The March 1 order emphasized that the court has not ordered the release of the data. Instead, the court has approved procedures to manage the provision of data to the party requesting it. Tira said that the case is still in the discovery phase .

“No data has been turned over,” Tira said. “There’s no date for it to be turned over. The court is still setting up the ground rules.”

Donate to The Piedmont Highlander

Your donation will support the student journalists of Piedmont High School. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
Donate to The Piedmont Highlander