California public school student Information to be released to a non-profit

[idnib]

A federal district court has decided that a non-profit, The Concerned Parents Association, will be able to have a database of information that includes information for all publicly schooled students, grades K-12, who enrolled any time after January 1, 2008.

 

Access to the information will be restricted to a few people, but includes SS numbers, mental health info, medical records, and disciplinary information. The article does not discuss the long-term protection of the database.

 

This includes, presumably, anyone who is homeschooling in CA under a charter umbrella. There is an opt-out (see bottom of article) but it's not being well-publicized.

[Arcadia]

No SS numbers were required for school registration. I am very sure because the school district can't ask about citizenship status and only look at the child's birth cert and immunization record.

 

ETA:

Copied from a California district website on documents needed for kindergarten registration.

 

"Copy of a birth certificate, baptismal certificate or passport"

Edited February 14, 2016 by Arcadia

[idnib]

No SS numbers were required for school registration. I am very sure because the school district can't ask about citizenship status and only look at the child's birth cert and immunization record.

 

ETA:

Copied from a California district website on documents needed for kindergarten registration.

 

"Copy of a birth certificate, baptismal certificate or passport"

 

Thats a good point. I've never enrolled for school so I don't know, but I do know undocumented children may enroll, so not having SS#s makes sense. I wonder why it's in the news article.

[Ellie]

A federal district court has decided that a non-profit, The Concerned Parents Association, will be able to have a database of information that includes information for all publicly schooled students, grades K-12, who enrolled any time after January 1, 2008.

 

Access to the information will be restricted to a few people, but includes SS numbers, mental health info, medical records, and disciplinary information. The article does not discuss the long-term protection of the database.

 

This includes, presumably, anyone who is homeschooling in CA under a charter umbrella. There is an opt-out (see bottom of article) but it's not being well-publicized.

 

Just to clarify, it is not a "homeschooling under charter umbrella." It is a public charter school in which the children are enrolled.

[Arcadia]

Thats a good point. I've never enrolled for school so I don't know, but I do know undocumented children may enroll, so not having SS#s makes sense. I wonder why it's in the news article.

The news article copied from the legal documents on the California department of education website. The form for objection for release of info is also on the website. One form per child and the form need to be mailed in by April.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/di/ws/morganhillcase.asp

[Ellie]

The news article copied from the legal documents on the California department of education website. The form for objection for release of info is also on the website. One form per child and the form need to be mailed in by April.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/di/ws/morganhillcase.asp

 

I wonder how many parents actually know this. To put it another way, I wonder how much effort the schools made to let the parents know they could refuse to allow this information to be released?

[idnib]

I wonder how many parents actually know this. To put it another way, I wonder how much effort the schools made to let the parents know they could refuse to allow this information to be released?

 

I asked a couple of friends of mine whose children attend public school and they had no idea. I first heard of it on a couple of CA homeschool lists.

Edited February 14, 2016 by idnib

[Ellie]

I asked a couple of friends of mine whose children attend public school and they had no idea. I first heard of it on a couple of CA homeschool lists.

 

I'd like to blame the schools for not informing the parents. However, I have been on the other end before--giving people information for something--when I've looked people in the eyeball and told that what to do and when they didn't they swore I never told them. ::facepalm:: So it is probably six of one and half a dozen of the other.

 

It shouldn't be like this, though. Why bureaucrats think it's necessary (or acceptable) to put private information on a data base is beyond me. 

[Tree Frog]

I wonder why they need to be able to identify specific students for a study. Why would they need ss numbers and addresses? I can understand disciplinary action/mental health evals if they're trying to find disabled students who have been discriminated against. Those could indicate possible discrimination. I don't understand why they would need to be able to identify those students, some of whom are presumably no longer attending school.

[Arcadia]

I wonder how many parents actually know this. To put it another way, I wonder how much effort the schools made to let the parents know they could refuse to allow this information to be released?

My district normally send a bilingual (english and spanish) flyer home with the weekly information/homework packet from K-8. Parents typically don't read it though.

 

For high school, it would just be an announcement on the high school webpage if they put it there.

[Ellie]

My district normally send a bilingual (english and spanish) flyer home with the weekly information/homework packet from K-8. Parents typically don't read it though.

 

For high school, it would just be an announcement on the high school webpage if they put it there.

 

Yeah, see, the schools should make more of an effort for something like this.

[Guest]

I saw this on the HSC list too, but did not feel comfortable starting the thread.

 

I will reiterate that anyone who wishes to withdraw their children from the public charter school in which the children are enrolled can fill out a simple online form to establish their own private school:

 

http://www.hsc.org/establishing-your-own-private-school.html

 

to legally homeschool in the state of California. A sample of the form with line by line instructions is available here:

 

http://a2zhomeschooling.com/regional/us/california/california_private_school_affidavit_sample/

Edited February 14, 2016 by Guest

[SeaConquest]

I saw this on the HSC list too, but did not feel comfortable starting the thread.

 

I will reiterate that anyone who wishes to withdraw their children from the public charter school in which the children are enrolled can fill out a simple online form to establish their own private school:

 

http://www.hsc.org/establishing-your-own-private-school.html

 

to legally homeschool in the state of California. A sample of the form with line by line instructions is available here:

 

http://a2zhomeschooling.com/regional/us/california/california_private_school_affidavit_sample/

 

IMHO, that seems a bit drastic. I mean, I think most of us here know how to file a PSA, and are choosing to enroll our kids in charter schools because we feel that they are the best fit for our families at this time. You can just use the court's opt-out form if you are concerned about your child's privacy. As always, YMMV.  

[Ellie]

IMHO, that seems a bit drastic. I mean, I think most of us here know how to file a PSA, and are choosing to enroll our kids in charter schools because we feel that they are the best fit for our families at this time. You can just use the court's opt-out form if you are concerned about your child's privacy. As always, YMMV.  

 

I would not assume that "most" know how to file a private school affidavit. I have spent too much time talking to people IRL about charter schools to assume that.

[Arcadia]

I will reiterate that anyone who wishes to withdraw their children from the public charter school ...

The non-profit group is getting data from 2008 onwards. That is from 8 years ago onwards. Some kids in the released data set may already have finished college by now.

 

Withdrawing from public school is irrelevant for this situation/lawsuit. Filling out and mailing the opt out form for each child under 18 that is or was in public school school is the way to go. Adults have to opt out to if they graduated from high school on or after 2008.

 

ETA:

Filing the PSA is a lot easier than registering my children for public school. No proof of residency, no immunisation records, no proof of identity needed for PSA. Any parent who has gone through the public school registration process probably finds filing the PSA easy in comparison.

Edited February 15, 2016 by Arcadia

[SeaConquest]

I would not assume that "most" know how to file a private school affidavit. I have spent too much time talking to people IRL about charter schools to assume that.

 

You honestly think that most of the people reading this thread, who have kids in charters school, don't know that we have the option to file a PSA? Seriously?

[Ellie]

You honestly think that most of the people reading this thread, who have kids in charters school, don't know that we have the option to file a PSA? Seriously?

 

I would not assume anything. Way too much experience.

[Tsuga]

A federal district court has decided that a non-profit, The Concerned Parents Association, will be able to have a database of information that includes information for all publicly schooled students, grades K-12, who enrolled any time after January 1, 2008.

 

Access to the information will be restricted to a few people, but includes SS numbers, mental health info, medical records, and disciplinary information. The article does not discuss the long-term protection of the database.

 

This includes, presumably, anyone who is homeschooling in CA under a charter umbrella. There is an opt-out (see bottom of article) but it's not being well-publicized.

 

Public schools frequently enter into data sharing agreements with non-profits which use the data to conduct studies on educational practices or to test for discrimination.

 

"The Concerned Parents Association said they need the information to see if California schools are violating the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and other related laws.

Source:  http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Calif-Student-Information-Released-to-Non-Profit-368556881.html#ixzz40CqCEwF1 

Follow us: @nbcsandiego on Twitter | NBCSanDiego on Facebook"

 

http://californiaconcernedparents.org

 

In other words, this is a public information request by a 501 c 3 to hold the government accountable. I bet they had to go through hell and high water to get that data.

 

However, it is shocking that they would ever release SSNs. I have to wonder if that is accurate. All our data, when used for research, is anonymized, and we have never released to a fully non-governmental non-profit. And almost never SSNs unless it's another Department of Education institution--in fact, I think never.

 

I have to wonder if someone doesn't want to be monitored by the public to see if they are discriminating by refusing services or marginalizing the disabled--so they are maligning this data request.

 

We have a three-month-long data sharing agreement process. We work with primary schools and they won't give us a darn thing that is not anonymized, but also, few ask. Those that do ask are usually trying to get access to do studies of the sort proposed here:

 

• check for discrimination
• check for institutional racism
• check for accuracy (by looking at patterns that suggest falsification)
• check for suppressed information, such as test scores and grades that don't match school public test scores
• match to non-profit information to see if the program that the non-profit provides results in better outcomes for students that they serve, and they need a large dataset to find comparable student populations

 

I could go on.

 

This doesn't creep me out. On the contrary I'm very suspicious of the motivations of the journalist / lawsuit.

 

I'm betting someone in California doesn't want to be scrutinized. That said, they never should have agreed to releasing SSNs--they could insert an arbitrary identifier and remove all names, and the group could easily get what they need. Or if they need names and DOBs, they could share that without SSNs.

 

I have never heard of a data sharing agreement that transferred SSNs. Too dangerous. Too much liability.

[Tsuga]

Thats a good point. I've never enrolled for school so I don't know, but I do know undocumented children may enroll, so not having SS#s makes sense. I wonder why it's in the news article.

 

I think it is wrong. I think someone wants to malign this group that is trying to study discrimination and violation of the ADA in the California public charter schools and the charter schools want to fight it but had to enter the agreement because of precedent.

 

I'd bet money on it.

 

They aren't going to exclude data with no SSN. Probably they didn't even request SSNs--they most likely requested "de-identified data" with no first, last, or SSN, DOB or YOB only, but in order to create chaos and drama, the releasing school refused to compromise, "the whole data set or nothing" and then tried to pull this.

 

Because I know for us in WA, it's pretty simple: we say you can have YOB, race, ethnicity, sex, grades, teacher, test scores, disability, year of entry, but nothing else, and most people are happy to get it.

 

And if we said NO! You can't have SSNs! Creepy as hell! (We have said this during meetings... "No, that is creepy, what the heck do they need that for?!?") then guess what?

 

They don't get the data. 

 

So I'm super, super skeptical of this angle.

[idnib]

Just to clarify, I didn't start the thread to urge people to switch our of public schools, charter or otherwise. My intent was to inform people of the court case and the opt-out for sharing data, that is all.

 

That said, I have met a fair number of people who are not aware of the affidavit option, and all of them had children who were previously attending public school. They pulled the kids out due to bullying or other problems and by asking other people affiliated with the school, they enrolled in online charters or such. In other words, they didn't research all the options as homeschoolers, they took the easily found and offered option. And not everyone who had kids in public school took this option, but everyone I've met who didn't know about the affidavit option had kids in public school previously. 

Edited February 15, 2016 by idnib

[Arcadia]

I think it is wrong. I think someone wants to malign this group that is trying to study discrimination and violation of the ADA in the California public charter schools and the charter schools want to fight it but had to enter the agreement because of precedent.

The lawsuit is filed against the California Dept of Education and covers all public school kids, not just those in charter school. It is a federal lawsuit.

 

The judge in this lawsuit is Kimberly Jo Mueller who is a federal district judge of the Sacramento Division of United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

 

This lawsuit situation is not fear mongering by the charter schools.

 

"REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS

As part of this lawsuit, and in order to prove their claims, Plaintiffs have requested that the California Department of Education (CDE) disclose subject to a Protective Order discussed below, information that it stores on databases and network drives that contain protected personal information of children, including children with disabilities, children who requested an assessment or who were assessed for special education eligibility, and children who are attending, or who have attended, a California school at any time since January 1, 2008. Examples of information that is stored on CDE’s databases and network drives includes name, social security number, home address, demographics, course information, statewide assessment results, teacher demographics, program information, behavior and discipline information, progress reports, special education assessment plans, special education assessments/evaluations, Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), records pertaining to health, mental health and medical information, student statewide identifiers (SSID), attendance statistics, information on suspensions and expulsions, and results on state tests."

 

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/di/ws/documents/order2016jan26.pdf

[Tsuga]

The lawsuit is filed against the California Dept of Education and covers all public school kids, not just those in charter school. It is a federal lawsuit.

 

The judge in this lawsuit is Kimberly Jo Mueller who is a federal district judge of the Sacramento Division of United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

 

This lawsuit situation is not fear mongering by the charter schools.

 

"REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS

As part of this lawsuit, and in order to prove their claims, Plaintiffs have requested that the California Department of Education (CDE) disclose subject to a Protective Order discussed below, information that it stores on databases and network drives that contain protected personal information of children, including children with disabilities, children who requested an assessment or who were assessed for special education eligibility, and children who are attending, or who have attended, a California school at any time since January 1, 2008. Examples of information that is stored on CDE’s databases and network drives includes name, social security number, home address, demographics, course information, statewide assessment results, teacher demographics, program information, behavior and discipline information, progress reports, special education assessment plans, special education assessments/evaluations, Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), records pertaining to health, mental health and medical information, student statewide identifiers (SSID), attendance statistics, information on suspensions and expulsions, and results on state tests."

 

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/di/ws/documents/order2016jan26.pdf

 

This even more confirms my suspicions.

 

1. It covers all the schools and is to test for discrimination.

 

2. The DATABASE includes SSN but they do not mention the exact data request. I.e. they may not have requested all the data, some of it is just stored there. I can assure you all that where I work we have huge stores of data from the FAFSA but if you think that when we enter into a data sharing agreement you get every piece of that, you're wrong.

 

The lawsuit may allege one thing but I for one don't believe automatically that this is what one school is saying. It is only one group accusing them of sharing data wrongly.

 

3. The judge is a judge... what difference does that make? She didn't bring the lawsuit. Who brought it and why? Why, when there are data sharing agreements of de-identified student data all the time?

 

 

 

[idnib]

Just to clarify, I didn't start the thread to urge people to switch our of public schools, charter or otherwise. My intent was to inform people of the court case and the opt-out for sharing data, that is all.

 

That said, I have met a fair number of people who are not aware of the affidavit option, and all of them had children who were previously attending public school. They pulled the kids out due to bullying or other problems and by asking other people affiliated with the school, they enrolled in online charters or such. In other words, they didn't research all the options as homeschoolers, they took the easily found and offered option. And not everyone who had kids in public school took this option, but everyone I've met who didn't know about the affidavit option had kids in public school previously. 

 

I'm quoting myself to clarify that 'm not being critical of parents who didn't research all the options, particularly because all the ones I met had both parents with careers outside the home so they were in the mindset of finding something quickly, under pressure, while maintaining their jobs. My point really was that there are indeed people who don't know about the affidavit option, and in my experience, they worked out of the home in good careers, and pulled their kids out of school under pressure, and were not given guidance from the school about the affidavit option, unsurprisingly.

[SeaConquest]

I'm quoting myself to clarify that 'm not being critical of parents who didn't research all the options, particularly because all the ones I met had both parents with careers outside the home so they were in the mindset of finding something quickly, under pressure, while maintaining their jobs. My point really was that there are indeed people who don't know about the affidavit option, and in my experience, they worked out of the home in good careers, and pulled their kids out of school under pressure, and were not given guidance from the school about the affidavit option, unsurprisingly.

 

Of course, there are homeschooling parents that are unaware of the PSA. But, I seriously doubt that that is the case for most of the Californians reading this thread. And, to suggest filing the PSA in a thread intended for parents with kids *already enrolled* in California charters strikes me as more of a political statement than anything else.

 

There is an undercurrent to some of the posts on this board that those of us with kids in charter schools 1) are not "real" homeschoolers and/or 2) are sell outs, and it is to that sentiment that I am responding.

[Ellie]

Just to clarify, I didn't start the thread to urge people to switch our of public schools, charter or otherwise. My intent was to inform people of the court case and the opt-out for sharing data, that is all.

 

That said, I have met a fair number of people who are not aware of the affidavit option, and all of them had children who were previously attending public school. They pulled the kids out due to bullying or other problems and by asking other people affiliated with the school, they enrolled in online charters or such. In other words, they didn't research all the options as homeschoolers, they took the easily found and offered option. And not everyone who had kids in public school took this option, but everyone I've met who didn't know about the affidavit option had kids in public school previously. 

 

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

[idnib]

Of course, there are homeschooling parents that are unaware of the PSA. But, I seriously doubt that that is the case for most of the Californians reading this thread. And, to suggest filing the PSA in a thread intended for parents with kids *already enrolled* in California charters strikes me as more of a political statement than anything else.

 

There is an undercurrent to some of the posts on this board that those of us with kids in charter schools 1) are not "real" homeschoolers and/or 2) are sell outs, and it is to that sentiment that I am responding.

 

I understand. 

[mamakelly]

Of course, there are homeschooling parents that are unaware of the PSA. But, I seriously doubt that that is the case for most of the Californians reading this thread. And, to suggest filing the PSA in a thread intended for parents with kids *already enrolled* in California charters strikes me as more of a political statement than anything else.

 

There is an undercurrent to some of the posts on this board that those of us with kids in charter schools 1) are not "real" homeschoolers and/or 2) are sell outs, and it is to that sentiment that I am responding.

 

Yes. In San Diego County alone there are 120 charter schools. Only 38 of them are non-classroom site based programs, meaning some sort of homeschooling program. The other 82 are regular typical schools.

 

I get really tired of the nasty comments this forum about homeschooling with a charter school. It's getting old.

[Roadrunner]

 

I get really tired of the nasty comments this forum about homeschooling with a charter school. It's getting old.

 

I want to add my voice to this as well. I am tired of hearing "legal definition" of homeschooling and how somehow we aren't technically homeschoolers. I have homeschooled with a PSA as well as with a charter. The only difference is the latter provided me with funds for activities I otherwise couldn't afford and my kids had to take the standardized tests, both of which were a positive development for my family. 

[Mergath]

There is an undercurrent to some of the posts on this board that those of us with kids in charter schools 1) are not "real" homeschoolers and/or 2) are sell outs, and it is to that sentiment that I am responding.

 

Sadly, it's not an undercurrent. There are certain posters who seem to wait for threads like this so they can jump in and tear down all the people who homeschool through a charter, or even people who ask about it.

 

My personal opinion is that, deep down, certain posters are envious of the funding families get through the charters.  ;)  I know I am. I'd love to get a chunk of cash from the state each year. *sigh*

[NatureMomma]

Yes. In San Diego County alone there are 120 charter schools. Only 38 of them are non-classroom site based programs, meaning some sort of homeschooling program. The other 82 are regular typical schools.

 

I get really tired of the nasty comments this forum about homeschooling with a charter school. It's getting old.

Getting tired of it too. I've homeschooled my daughter since K privately, and this year we decided to use a charter. There's no class instruction, I use the same curriculum I've been using for years, and they give me $2200 a year for doing so! I meet once a month with the nicest lady for about 10-15 minutes. I sign my name, email her work samples, chat about what my daughters doing and what she likes and that's it. This allows me to pay for her ballet and jazz classes, gymnastics, her all day Homeschool Forest class once a week, and her weekly homeschool class day (taught independently by a homeschool teacher) in addition to any art supplies or curriculum of my choosing I want them to order.

I wouldn't be able to afford it otherwise, and I'm literally doing NOTHING different learning wise with her. I'm greatly appreciative of this, and really don't like the implication that I'm somehow not homeschooling my dd.

[TranquilMind]

I wonder why they need to be able to identify specific students for a study. Why would they need ss numbers and addresses? I can understand disciplinary action/mental health evals if they're trying to find disabled students who have been discriminated against. Those could indicate possible discrimination. I don't understand why they would need to be able to identify those students, some of whom are presumably no longer attending school.

This is absolutely a grave privacy violation and needs to be eliminated now.   People need to fight stuff like this, but they don't.  They just naively assert that of course no one would ever do anything nefarious with all this private info or that some entity "needs" it, so it's ok.

 

I can't believe what I see some days. 

 

The personal details are all NONE of their freaking business. 

 

 

Edited February 18, 2016 by TranquilMind

[TranquilMind]

Sadly, it's not an undercurrent. There are certain posters who seem to wait for threads like this so they can jump in and tear down all the people who homeschool through a charter, or even people who ask about it.

 

My personal opinion is that, deep down, certain posters are envious of the funding families get through the charters.   ;)  I know I am. I'd love to get a chunk of cash from the state each year. *sigh*

Eh, never mind.  No envy here, but not in CA, so it doesn't matter. 

Edited February 18, 2016 by TranquilMind

[JoJosMom]

A federal district court has decided that a non-profit, The Concerned Parents Association, will be able to have a database of information that includes information for all publicly schooled students, grades K-12, who enrolled any time after January 1, 2008.

 

Access to the information will be restricted to a few people, but includes SS numbers, mental health info, medical records, and disciplinary information. The article does not discuss the long-term protection of the database.

 

This includes, presumably, anyone who is homeschooling in CA under a charter umbrella. There is an opt-out (see bottom of article) but it's not being well-publicized.

 

 

The news article copied from the legal documents on the California department of education website. The form for objection for release of info is also on the website. One form per child and the form need to be mailed in by April.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/di/ws/morganhillcase.asp

 

Thank you for starting this thread, OP, and thank you, Arcadia, for the link to the opt-out form.  Our first year of homeschooling was done through a charter in California.  We have been gone from that state for over 5 years, and I would not have heard about this situation if not for this thread.  I appreciate the information.

[idnib]

Here's an updated article from the San Jose Mercury News.

 

So, the opt-out is not really an opt-out, just an objection that one may file with the court.

 

 

While concerned parents may file an objection in federal court to protest the release of their children's records, it's unclear what federal Judge Kimberly J. Mueller in Sacramento plans to do with the requests. Even if she approves them, the complexity of combing through the data means there's no guarantee that all seven huge state databases can be cleared of all information on children whose parents sought an exemption.

Mueller, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, is holding a hearing Monday inquiring into whether the California Department of Education followed her orders in posting information about the data release and how parents can file a protest. No date has been set for the data release.

...

The plaintiffs say they seek to prove patterns and don't want personal information. "Our legal team gave many different scenarios in which actual databases would not have to be handed over," said Linda McNulty, who approached Sagy in 2008 to press the state to beef up special-education oversight. She formed Morgan Hill Concerned Parents and a sister state group that together filed suit. All along, she said, the state has refused to cooperate.

 

 

Edited February 25, 2016 by idnib

[JoJosMom]

Here's an updated article from the San Jose Mercury News.

 

So, the opt-out is not really an opt-out, just an objection that one may file with the court.

 

 

:cursing:

[SeaConquest]

Gah. What a clusterf**k.

[Arcadia]

Not a surprise since there are more than 6 million public school kids in k-12 for California in any school year and about 400k graduates per year.

So more than 8 million records to comb through.

[Arcadia]

The judge's office was flooded with parents opt out form and she decided to backtrack.

 

http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_29590794/judge-pulls-back-from-calif-student-records-release

 

ETA:

"Responding to overwhelming public protest, a federal judge has backtracked on the potential release of records for 10 million California students -- and decided that they won't be provided to attorneys in a special-education lawsuit."

 

"Her court has been so inundated with objection forms -- which had to be mailed to court -- that officials can't even read them. Mueller this week ordered the forms archived in sealed boxes."

Edited March 4, 2016 by Arcadia

[Ellie]

The judge's office was flooded with parents opt out form and she decided to backtrack.

 

http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_29590794/judge-pulls-back-from-calif-student-records-release

 

ETA:

"Responding to overwhelming public protest, a federal judge has backtracked on the potential release of records for 10 million California students -- and decided that they won't be provided to attorneys in a special-education lawsuit."

 

"Her court has been so inundated with objection forms -- which had to be mailed to court -- that officials can't even read them. Mueller this week ordered the forms archived in sealed boxes."

 

Excellent!

[...................]

This is a win. It's unbelievable to me that it almost happened though!

[908874]

This is not resolved. The information could still be released.

 

Quotes from the linked article below:

 

"The court also reiterated that no student’s personally identifiable information may be released to the plaintiffs unless and until they demonstrate to the satisfaction of the court that the method to be used to store the sensitive student data is secure, the CDE noted. The parties are still litigating the extent of the disclosure of student data."

 

"Judge Mueller’s order made clear that the objection forms are not a means to “opt-out†of any data release. The court will maintain the objection forms in sealed boxes in a secure room at the federal court building in Sacramento."

 

http://www.morganhilltimes.com/news/schools/updated-parent-group-responds-to-change-in-court-order/article_ea26a9ce-e261-11e5-9107-27717e227bc5.html