Fla. Gov. calls for investigation into Student suspension over word Jesus

[Coyote]

Well shouldn't the school have an explanation for suspending a student like this? Why aren't we hearing their side of the story?

Probably because their side of the story is indefensible and would lead to calls to fire this prof. Which they can't do for PC reasons. So they are lying low and hoping it all goes away.

No, probably because this has gone into litigation and they aren't allowed to present their side of the story per their lawyers. That is what usually happens when an institution is sued. It's not trial by public opinion.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Well shouldn't the school have an explanation for suspending a student like this? Why aren't we hearing their side of the story?

Privacy laws.

 

[flacaltenn]

Well shouldn't the school have an explanation for suspending a student like this? Why aren't we hearing their side of the story?

Privacy laws.

That's a stretch.. What happens in a University lecture hall is no more private than a Karaoke Lounge. I don't remember signing away any rights to discuss happenings in class -- do you?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Well shouldn't the school have an explanation for suspending a student like this? Why aren't we hearing their side of the story?

Privacy laws.

That's a stretch.. What happens in a University lecture hall is no more private than a Karaoke Lounge. I don't remember signing away any rights to discuss happenings in class -- do you?

The disciplinary records, including why the student was suspended, are protected by privacy laws. Those same privacy laws that prevent Columbia from releasing Obama's records.

I imagine that the school's lawyer has instructed the teacher to not comment either.

 

[flacaltenn]

Privacy laws.

That's a stretch.. What happens in a University lecture hall is no more private than a Karaoke Lounge. I don't remember signing away any rights to discuss happenings in class -- do you?

The disciplinary records, including why the student was suspended, are protected by privacy laws. Those same privacy laws that prevent Columbia from releasing Obama's records.

I imagine that the school's lawyer has instructed the teacher to not comment either.

All that ass-protecting seems to INSURE a good visible court case then don't it?

Sometimes, you gotta tell the lawyers to a hike before that molehill turns into a full fledged mountain range...

 

[tinydancer]

If the class was about symbolism, write obama's name on a piece of paper and step on it.

Maybe because the professor Dr. Deandre Poole is also the Vice Chair of the Palm Beach County Democrats? BTW: DoctorIsIn -- you need to broaden your cultural sensitivities. A full lunch at PopEyes says that Deandre IS a male.

What were told is that the student asked the teacher "not to do that again". Which was an adequate threat to get him tossed from classes.

Seems like the University has a glaring inconsistentcy in their tolerance for speech if the Professor can get that much rope and the student has none. "Don't do that again" is not a threat in itself. Or do we need to analyze this from the Palm Beach Democrat prospective?

Vice Chair of the Palm Beach County Dems?

Oh this gets sweeter by the moment.

 

[Oldstyle]

Well shouldn't the school have an explanation for suspending a student like this? Why aren't we hearing their side of the story?

Privacy laws.

How so? When the student is going on national news programs with his version of events it's obvious that his privacy wouldn't be breached. Is it the privacy of the class instructor that we're protecting? Because I find it difficult to see someone teaching a class at a public university to have a claim to privacy about what he's teaching in that class. Sorry, Doc...but I'm not buying into a "privacy" issue here.

 

[Oldstyle]

Privacy laws.

That's a stretch.. What happens in a University lecture hall is no more private than a Karaoke Lounge. I don't remember signing away any rights to discuss happenings in class -- do you?

The disciplinary records, including why the student was suspended, are protected by privacy laws. Those same privacy laws that prevent Columbia from releasing Obama's records.

I imagine that the school's lawyer has instructed the teacher to not comment either.

The student in this case has in effect released his own records in regards to what happened in that classroom. If Barack Obama released his own academic records then on what legal grounds would he be able to sue Columbia for making public something that has already been made public?

 

[Oldstyle]

What is an institution of higher learning's obligation and or rights, if a student was to claim academic accomplishments that were in fact not what his or her records indicate? Would a school be barred from disputing the student's claim because of "privacy" issues? Quite frankly I find that hard to believe.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That's a stretch.. What happens in a University lecture hall is no more private than a Karaoke Lounge. I don't remember signing away any rights to discuss happenings in class -- do you?

The disciplinary records, including why the student was suspended, are protected by privacy laws. Those same privacy laws that prevent Columbia from releasing Obama's records.

I imagine that the school's lawyer has instructed the teacher to not comment either.

The student in this case has in effect released his own records in regards to what happened in that classroom. If Barack Obama released his own academic records then on what legal grounds would he be able to sue Columbia for making public something that has already been made public?

There's no such thing as "in effect" released his records. There's no automatic public release of records simply because he's making a big deal about it.

Until he signs a piece of paper releasing his records to the press, the University can't say a damn thing about them.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What is an institution of higher learning's obligation and or rights, if a student was to claim academic accomplishments that were in fact not what his or her records indicate? Would a school be barred from disputing the student's claim because of "privacy" issues? Quite frankly I find that hard to believe.

The school can, and has released the Code violation that he was charged with. (Threatening/Violent Speech)

The school cannot release the details of the circumstance that led to those charges.

It's a matter of details - a school can release whether or not a student graduated with a specific degree, but not what his grades were, or what his disciplinary record was.

 

[Oldstyle]

The disciplinary records, including why the student was suspended, are protected by privacy laws. Those same privacy laws that prevent Columbia from releasing Obama's records.

I imagine that the school's lawyer has instructed the teacher to not comment either.

The student in this case has in effect released his own records in regards to what happened in that classroom. If Barack Obama released his own academic records then on what legal grounds would he be able to sue Columbia for making public something that has already been made public?

There's no such thing as "in effect" released his records. There's no automatic public release of records simply because he's making a big deal about it.

Until he signs a piece of paper releasing his records to the press, the University can't say a damn thing about them.

So let me get this straight...a student can make public and false claims against the University and they can't respond because of privacy laws? I find that hard to believe, Doc. Common sense tells me that once someone goes public with a story that they have in essence waived their right to privacy in regards to that story.

 

[Coyote]

The student in this case has in effect released his own records in regards to what happened in that classroom. If Barack Obama released his own academic records then on what legal grounds would he be able to sue Columbia for making public something that has already been made public?

There's no such thing as "in effect" released his records. There's no automatic public release of records simply because he's making a big deal about it.

Until he signs a piece of paper releasing his records to the press, the University can't say a damn thing about them.

So let me get this straight...a student can make public and false claims against the University and they can't respond because of privacy laws? I find that hard to believe, Doc. Common sense tells me that once someone goes public with a story that they have in essence waived their right to privacy in regards to that story.

You better believe it.

They can not release any information concerning student records, disciplinary actions etc without a release from the student and that includes releasing information to the student's parents. Just because a student mouths off doesn't release the university to do the same. These are strict laws that have to be adhered to or the university faces serious consequences - the student can turn right around and sue them.

 

[Oldstyle]

There's no such thing as "in effect" released his records. There's no automatic public release of records simply because he's making a big deal about it.

Until he signs a piece of paper releasing his records to the press, the University can't say a damn thing about them.

So let me get this straight...a student can make public and false claims against the University and they can't respond because of privacy laws? I find that hard to believe, Doc. Common sense tells me that once someone goes public with a story that they have in essence waived their right to privacy in regards to that story.

You better believe it.

They can not release any information concerning student records, disciplinary actions etc without a release from the student and that includes releasing information to the student's parents. Just because a student mouths off doesn't release the university to do the same. These are strict laws that have to be adhered to or the university faces serious consequences - the student can turn right around and sue them.

You don't know your privacy law, Coyote...schools do in fact have the right to release information to the student's parents.

 

[Oldstyle]

Here's my contention and I freely admit that I'm not a lawyer so feel free to tell me why I'm incorrect. Rights of privacy like most rights work both ways. If someone goes "public" with a story that is incorrect and harmful to another individual then something referred to as the common-law tort of "false-light publicity" protects individuals from the public disclosure of false information about their reputation, beliefs, or activities. If a student goes public with a story that is incorrect and harmful to an educational institution then why would that institution lose their right to defend their reputation by answering the student's version of events with their own?

 

[Coyote]

So let me get this straight...a student can make public and false claims against the University and they can't respond because of privacy laws? I find that hard to believe, Doc. Common sense tells me that once someone goes public with a story that they have in essence waived their right to privacy in regards to that story.

You better believe it.

They can not release any information concerning student records, disciplinary actions etc without a release from the student and that includes releasing information to the student's parents. Just because a student mouths off doesn't release the university to do the same. These are strict laws that have to be adhered to or the university faces serious consequences - the student can turn right around and sue them.

You don't know your privacy law, Coyote...schools do in fact have the right to release information to the student's parents.

We are talking Higher Education, not primary schools or high schools. I work for a university and I am very familiar with the laws because I have to adhere to them or I get in trouble. Schools can not release information even to a parent without a signed form on file allowing them to do so (if the student is 18 or over, which covers most).

 

[Oldstyle]

You better believe it.

They can not release any information concerning student records, disciplinary actions etc without a release from the student and that includes releasing information to the student's parents. Just because a student mouths off doesn't release the university to do the same. These are strict laws that have to be adhered to or the university faces serious consequences - the student can turn right around and sue them.

You don't know your privacy law, Coyote...schools do in fact have the right to release information to the student's parents.

We are talking Higher Education, not primary schools or high schools. I work for a university and I am very familiar with the laws because I have to adhere to them or I get in trouble. Schools can not release information even to a parent without a signed form on file allowing them to do so (if the student is 18 or over, which covers most).

You may think you know the law but you don't really...

"When a student turns 18 years old or enters a postsecondary institution at any age, all rights afforded to parents under FERPA transfer to the student. However, FERPA also provides ways in which schools may share information with parents without the student's consent. For example:
Schools may disclose education records to parents if the student is a dependent for income tax purposes.
Schools may disclose education records to parents if a health or safety emergency involves their son or daughter.
Schools may inform parents if the student who is under age 21 has violated any law or its policy concerning the use or possession of alcohol or a controlled substance.
A school official may generally share with a parent information that is based on that official's personal knowledge or observation of the student."
Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings

 

[Oldstyle]

I would make the case that MOST students at your place of employment are currently being claimed by their parents as "dependents" for income tax purposes.

 

[Coyote]

You don't know your privacy law, Coyote...schools do in fact have the right to release information to the student's parents.

We are talking Higher Education, not primary schools or high schools. I work for a university and I am very familiar with the laws because I have to adhere to them or I get in trouble. Schools can not release information even to a parent without a signed form on file allowing them to do so (if the student is 18 or over, which covers most).

You may think you know the law but you don't really...

"When a student turns 18 years old or enters a postsecondary institution at any age, all rights afforded to parents under FERPA transfer to the student. However, FERPA also provides ways in which schools may share information with parents without the student's consent. For example:
Schools may disclose education records to parents if the student is a dependent for income tax purposes.
Schools may disclose education records to parents if a health or safety emergency involves their son or daughter.
Schools may inform parents if the student who is under age 21 has violated any law or its policy concerning the use or possession of alcohol or a controlled substance.
A school official may generally share with a parent information that is based on that official's personal knowledge or observation of the student."
Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings

That is interesting because it is not what we are told - we have to be extremely careful with releasing any information without a FERPA form - specifically we can not release academic performance information.

However - if that is accurate, it still only refers to parents. A school can not publically release that information to the general public or media.

 

[Oldstyle]

Balancing Student Privacy and School Safety: A Guide to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act for Colleges and Universities - PFCO

It's a common misconception amongst college administrators, which is why a policy clarification was made.