Could a Louisiana school board adopt the proposed policy for access to student records under the 2015 law?

Plain-English summary

Representative John Schroder asked whether proposed local school board policy language on student data access fit La. R.S. 17:3914(H), as amended in 2015. The Attorney General concluded that the proposed language was not inconsistent with that provision. The provision permitted a local board to adopt a policy governing access to student records but did not set particular requirements for its content or application.

The proposed language would allow specified school employees or superintendent-authorized persons to access listed categories of student information for a legitimate educational purpose, unless a parent, guardian, or adult student directed otherwise in writing. The list included school activities, health and safety, transcripts, online tools, school photography, contracted student services, and directory information to the extent allowed by FERPA. The AG evaluated that language as a proposed policy; the opinion did not say every board had adopted it.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2015. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Did the 2015 provision require every school board to use this policy?

No. The AG said the statute left the content and application of student-record access policies to local school board discretion. It assessed the language presented for possible adoption.

Could a board include school activities and yearbook providers in its access policy?

The proposed policy listed extracurricular activities, school photography, and yearbook providers. The AG concluded the proposed language as a whole was not inconsistent with La. R.S. 17:3914(H).

What did the proposed language say about parents’ objections?

It began with an exception for a parent, legal guardian, or adult student who directed otherwise in writing. The opinion did not prescribe how a school board should implement that provision.

Did the opinion remove other student privacy limits?

No. The AG assessed consistency with Subparagraph H. The proposed language itself called for access in accordance with FERPA and the cited state statute.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion traced the provision from Act 837 of 2014 to Act 228 of 2015. The amended text allowed a public-school employee or superintendent-authorized person to access student records “in accordance with a policy adopted by the local public school board.” The AG reasoned that because the provision gave no specific content or application requirements, local boards had discretion to adopt policies they believed reasonable and necessary for student-information access.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/15-0103

Original opinion text

~tate of llioulslIum:
DEPARTMENT OF JU5T1CE
P.O. BOX 94005
BATON ROUGE
70804-9005
JAMES O. "BUDDY" CALDWELL
ATTORNEY CENERAl

JUL 29 2015
OPINION 15-0103

94 - SCHOOLS & SCHOOL DISTRICTS - Administration, Government and Officers
Hon. John M. Schroder, Sr.
State Representative
La. R.S.17:3914(H)
District 77
La. R.S. 17:3914(H) authorizes local public school boards to
522 N. New Hampshire Street
adopt a policy for access to student records but does not
Suite 1
include any specific requirements for such policies. As such,
Covington, LA 70433
the content and application of such policies is left to the
discretion of the local public school boards and the proposed policy language is not inconsistent with La. R.S. 17:3914(H).

Dear Representative Schroder:

You have requested an opinion from our office regarding proposed policy language being considered by local school districts relative to student data privacy pursuant to La.
R.S. 17:3914(H).

Specifically you ask whether proposed policy language which is being considered for adoption by some school boards is consistent with La. RS. 17:3914(H), as amended in 2015.

Act 837 of the 2014 Regular Legislative Session, authored by you, enacted what is now La. RS. 17:3914. This statute provides for the protection of "personally identifiable student information" as defined in the statute. The statute outlines the circumstances under which various persons or entities may have access to protected student information and provides for penalties for knowing and willful violation of its provisions.

You advise that "the primary focus [of Act 837] was mandating the creation of the unique identifier system, preventing the State from broad access to personally identifiable student information, and preventing the sale or commercialization of student data." Your request letter further states that it was never your intent to prohibit "many common and non-intrusive uses of student information for such things as sports team rosters and displays of student names on school grounds."

Page 2

Honorable John M. Schroder Sr.
OPINION 15-0103
Page 2

In addition to the specific permissions and prohibitions contained in the statute, with the intent to recognize acceptable access to information for school activities, you included a general exception in Subparagraph H that read as follows:

Nothing in this Section shall prohibit a school system employee employed at the school and a person authorized by the superintendent of the school system from having access to a student's records as may be necessary to perform his duties.

Subsequent to the passage of Act 837, you determined that the original SUbparagraph H did not provide enough flexibility to local school districts in allowing access to student data for ordinary and customary educational activities. Therefore, in 2015, you authored Act 228 to amend Subparagraph H, which now reads:

Nothing in this section shall prohibit a person employed in a public school or other person authorized by the superintendent of the public school or school system from having access to a student's records in accordance with a policy adopted by the local public school board for such purpose.'

As currently written, Subparagraph H provides a general exception to La. RS. 17:3914 when a local school board adopts a policy allowing access to protected student information. We note that La. RS. 17:3914(H) does not mandate any specific content or application for such policies. You report that although such parameters were considered, "[d]iscussions with stakeholders and staff led to the conclusion that the local superintendent and local school board could be trusted to only allow access to student data when appropriate." You further state that the intention of the amendment to Subparagraph H "was to place into the hands of the local elected school board the ability to adopt policies that best fit the standards of their local community."

The Louisiana School Boards Association has advised us that, pursuant to La. RS. 17:3914(H), school districts are considering adopting a proposed student data policy, and some districts are considering including the following language in their proposed policies:

Unless directed in writing otherwise by a student's parent, legal guardian or a student who has reached the age or majority, the Board approves a person employed in a school or person authorized by the superintendent to provide access to certain student personally identifiable information to further a legitimate educational purpose, in accordance with FERPA and LRS 17:3914 as follows:
--Information to protect the health, safety, or welfare of a student or the general public;

I The amendment also changed the effective date of the statute's requirements from June 1, 2015, to

August 1, 2015.

Page 3

Honorable John M. Schroder Sr.
OPINION 15-0103
Page 3

--Information to facilitate a student's participation in a school sanctioned extracurricular activity, including but not limited to a sport, organization or club;
--Information to facilitate the operation and daily activities within district facilities, including but not limited to the display and use of student information in and around student facilities;
--Programs and activities related to school sanctioned performances or productions, events, award programs, and graduations;
--University Transcript requests, Scholarships, and admissions;
--LHSAA, NCAA and other related sports programs or sanctioning entities;
--Online resources and educational tools;
--School Photography and Yearbook providers;
--Information provided in accordance with a contract between the Board and a public or private entity which has been contracted to perform student or education services, but only to the extent provided for in such a contract; and
--Directory information, to the extent allowed in FERPA.

Based on the foregoing, it is the opinion of this office that because La. R.S. 17:3914(H) does not contain any specific prohibitions as to content or application of a policy regulating access to student records, local school boards have discretion to adopt such policies as they believe reasonable and necessary relative to student information access. Therefore, it is the further opinion of this office that the proposed policy language presented above, if adopted by a school board, is not inconsistent with La. R.S. 17:3914(H).

We hope that this opinion has addressed the issues that you have raised. If our office can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

With best regards,

MES D. "BUDDY" CALDWELL
ORNEY GENERAL

BY:
Patricia H. Wilton
Assistant Attorney General

JDC:PHW